Insurers warn Obamacare is unsustainable,

[docyabut2]

http://www.aol.com/a...o-ris/21345061/

and they all thought it was all going to be free health care

Edited April 16, 2016 by docyabut2

[supervike]

Totally agree.

[supervike]

Totally disagree.

[bubblykiss]

Large for profit companies designed to rob the healthy and turn away the sick are not making money? Terrible.

[Darkenpath25]

Nothing with Obama's name attached is free

[+and-then]

Many thought at the time it was pushed through that the ultimate intent was for the ACA to fail and for the only recourse to be single payer which was what the Left actually wanted all along. Our health care system desperately needs reform but the system that Obama has overseen is not viable and will only raise cost while lowering quality.

[+DieChecker]

The only reason it has lasted this long is that most of the stupidest parts, which incidentally were the parts that were supposed to pay for much of it, were "delayed" by Congress.

[Leonardo]

It's amusing how the news that some insurers are taking losses under ACA is spun. The industry is spinning it to be a problem with ACA itself, but that is not the truth. What these figures actually show, is that the healthcare providers are overcharging - and they are doing so because, for a very long time, they could get away with it.

Insurers and healthcare providers claim the only solution is to raise premiums - but that also is a lie. A better solution is for the healthcare providers to lower their charges, but we all know greater profit (they would still profit if their charges for services were reduced) rules.

[aztek]

Our health care system desperately needs reform but the system that Obama has overseen is not viable and will only raise cost while lowering quality.

the only reforms that will happen will be to benefit those that make money on it, not regular joes, for one simple reason, the people that make changes are the people that profit from it, do people really think gvnmt will kill the chicken that lays golden eggs for them????

[ninjadude]

Insurers and healthcare providers claim the only solution is to raise premiums

which the ACA now limits. See below. Some companies have had to rebate money to customers that they have overcharged. People who live in states that don't care about rate increases have just rubber-stamped them.

And remember before the ACA premiums were rising by incredible amounts.

The Affordable Care Act contains two major provisions that regulate health insurance providers increasing rates they are:

Rate Review Provision – Insurance companies have to justify rate hikes of over 10% to the State.

Medical Loss Ratio / 80/20 Rule – Insurance companies have to spend at least 80 percent of premium dollars on claims and activities to improve health care quality. 85% in large group markets.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-health-insurance-premiums/

[Thanato]

Then make it public healthcare have private and public....

[Jarocal]

And remember before the ACA premiums were rising by incredible amounts.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-health-insurance-premiums/

Actually at the company I work for the largest premium increase seen was when the ACA Mandate took effect. Yes they were going up every year but not by the same margin.

[Merc14]

which the ACA now limits. See below. Some companies have had to rebate money to customers that they have overcharged. People who live in states that don't care about rate increases have just rubber-stamped them.

And remember before the ACA premiums were rising by incredible amounts.

http://obamacarefact...rance-premiums/

Stop! Just stop. The fact is if the premiums don't go WAY up and the government doesn't reimburse the losses the insurers are incurring, then the insurers will leave the co-ops and ACA dies. It is happening now and you would know that if you'd read the various links posted. Oh yeah, I forgot, you can't do that because they aren't from virulently left wing sites.

BTW why do you never mention the the thousands of dollars deductibles which mean that while they are paying for these very, very expensive insurance policies they aren't even using them because they never meet the deductible? Bloody shill is what you are, mate. This article references the NY Times so your religious restrictions allow you to look at it. LMFAO. http://hotair.com/ar...ically-useless/

Here is a quote:

“The deductible, $3,000 a year, makes it impossible to actually go to the doctor,” said David R. Reines, 60, of Jefferson Township, N.J., a former hardware salesman with chronic knee pain. “We have insurance, but can’t afford to use it.”

Here is another Mr. Shill"

Kevin Fanning of Texas told the New York Times that “Basically I was paying for insurance I could not afford to use.” Fanning said that he and his wife “had a policy with a monthly premium of about $500 and an annual deductible of about $10,000 after taking account of financial assistance. Their income is about $32,000 a year.” That’s nearly one-third of their income just to get the insurance company to cover them if they actually need to seek care.

All NY Times approved Mr. Shill so dig in.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Merc14

[Leonardo]

Stop! Just stop. The fact is if the premiums don't go WAY up and the government doesn't reimburse the losses the insurers are incurring, then the insurers will leave the co-ops and ACA dies. It is happening now and you would know that if you'd read the various links posted. Oh yeah, I forgot, you can't do that because they aren't from virulently left wing sites.

BTW why do you never mention the the thousands of dollars deductibles which mean that while they are paying for these very, very expensive insurance policies they aren't even using them because they never meet the deductible? Bloody shill is what you are, mate. This article references the NY Times so your religious restrictions allow you to look at it. LMFAO. http://hotair.com/ar...ically-useless/

Here is a quote:

“The deductible, $3,000 a year, makes it impossible to actually go to the doctor,” said David R. Reines, 60, of Jefferson Township, N.J., a former hardware salesman with chronic knee pain. “We have insurance, but can’t afford to use it.”

Here is another Mr. Shill"

Kevin Fanning of Texas told the New York Times that “Basically I was paying for insurance I could not afford to use.” Fanning said that he and his wife “had a policy with a monthly premium of about $500 and an annual deductible of about $10,000 after taking account of financial assistance. Their income is about $32,000 a year.” That’s nearly one-third of their income just to get the insurance company to cover them if they actually need to seek care.

All NY Times approved Mr. Shill so dig in.

The size of the deductibles added to health insurance policies merely indicates the overcharging that the healthcare providers have been able to enact due to the lack of any regulation and the fact that insurance has, in the past, only been available to citizens of relative means - meaning the size of the "deductible" has been easier for those insured to absorb.

Now (because of ACA) insurance is mandated for people of less means, but the insurance providers are still forced to maintain the same size of deductible (or even increase it) because the healthcare providers are not being regulated as the insurance industry is. I'm not sure if ACA, in it's original form, incorporated such regulation of the charges healthcare providers could levy but such regulation is necessary if socialised healthcare is to be effectively provided to all citizens.

The American public mistakenly believes that private, unregulated industry leads to competition which inevitably lowers prices. Historically, this has not been shown to be true and has, in fact, been shown to have the opposite effect where industry collusion to either increase charges or maintain high charges occurs.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Leonardo

[Merc14]

The size of the deductibles added to health insurance policies merely indicates the overcharging that the healthcare providers have been able to enact due to the lack of any regulation and the fact that insurance has, in the past, only been available to citizens of relative means - meaning the size of the "deductible" has been easier for those insured to absorb.

Now (because of ACA) insurance is mandated for people of less means, but the insurance providers are still forced to maintain the same size of deductible (or even increase it) because the healthcare providers are not being regulated as the insurance industry is. I'm not sure if ACA, in it's original form, incorporated such regulation of the charges healthcare providers could levy but such regulation is necessary if socialised healthcare is to be effectively provided to all citizens.

The American public mistakenly believes that private, unregulated industry leads to competition which inevitably lowers prices. Historically, this has not been shown to be true and has, in fact, been shown to have the opposite effect where industry collusion to either increase charges or maintain high charges occurs.

What a load of ****e. Deregulating the airlines certainly proves you wrong so why don't you go back and learn basic economics.

The medical industry is one of the most heavily regulated in the United States and the economics of patient care is mainly driven by Medicare and Medicaid. Also, Insurers are not allowed to compete across state lines which is even more of the regulation you say doesn't exist. Then we have the legal side of the coin which is allowed to rampantly sue for malpractice and rates unseen in the rest of the world.

[aztek]

we also have a rate of medical mistakes not seen anywhere in the world, we have 500k people die a year as a result of medical mistakes, in germany only 17k, even if you adjust for population, we have 300m people and half a million dies a year, germany has 80 mil, and only 17k die.

but no surprises here, that is what happens when people become doctors to make that huge money, treating\curing people is not why they in it. but money , and their priorities reflect that clearly

Edited April 19, 2016 by aztek

[godnodog]

Americans need to face it, they (most probably) have the best health services in the world, and they are way overcharged by the private sector, and who do they blame? Obama! because, apparently, before him every one could afford privat health care. It was even his fault when in 2006, before he was even president, the number of uninsured people hit all time high (according to a 2014 article with statistical data).

Yes obamacare sucks, but so does the system before, and most likely the upcoming replacing system. At least privat health care is far more affordable in soviet EU and still make a profit.

[Merc14]

we also have a rate of medical mistakes not seen anywhere in the world, we have 500k people die a year as a result of medical mistakes, in germany only 17k, even if you adjust for population, we have 300m people and half a million dies a year, germany has 80 mil, and only 17k die.

but no surprises here, that is what happens when people become doctors to make that huge money, treating\curing people is not why they in it. but money , and their priorities reflect that clearly

Aren't you simply providing proof that massive malpractice lawsuits don't work?

Americans need to face it, they (most probably) have the best health services in the world, and they are way overcharged by the private sector, and who do they blame? Obama! because, apparently, before him every one could afford privat health care. It was even his fault when in 2006, before he was even president, the number of uninsured people hit all time high (according to a 2014 article with statistical data).

Yes obamacare sucks, but so does the system before, and most likely the upcoming replacing system. At least privat health care is far more affordable in soviet EU and still make a profit.

Except no one but you thinks that. Everyone knew that healthcare needed to be fixed but 55% of us didn't agree that Obamacare was the way to fix it. That 55% is now proven correct at the cost of billions of lost dollars and we still need to fix healthcare.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Merc14

[aztek]

Aren't you simply providing proof that massive malpractice lawsuits don't work?

who knows, may be they do, may be they do not, but i would not say the numbers prove much other that we have half a million deaths a year that should have not happen, may be there would be a lot more deaths if not for lawsuits, may be not, may be lawsuits only provide compensation for victims, not really a deterrent for mistakes, every doctor has insurance so it is insurance that pays, hospitals have insurances, private practices with more than 1 doctor have insurance, so doctors and industry does not lose much. if anything. it is all the cost of doing businesses. and that is the main issue it is a business. making money is the main goal, not making people healthier. that is just means to make that money

[Merc14]

who knows, may be they do, may be they do not, but i would not say the numbers prove much other that we have half a million deaths a year that should have not happen, may be there would be a lot more deaths if not for lawsuits, may be not, may be lawsuits only provide compensation for victims, not really a deterrent for mistakes, every doctor has insurance so it is insurance that pays, hospitals have insurances, private practices with more than 1 doctor have insurance, so doctors and industry does not lose much. if anything. it is all the cost of doing businesses. and that is the main issue it is a business. making money is the main goal, not making people healthier. that is just means to make that money

No it is you who pay for the malpractice insurance, never forget that. An amusing conundrum for believers in singe payer is that the first control the government applies is a cap on malpractice compensation but if you ask why don't we cap malpractice compensation right now thereby greatly lowering the cost of malpractice insurance and therefore the cost of healthcare they get quite upset.

I have always been of the mind that we should've tried a few relatively straightforward fixes, see how the effected the industry and then legislate a healthcare system:

1. Cap malpractice compensation. We could use Canada's caps as lefties love to bring up CHS in these conversations.

2. Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines.

3. Take the 14,000 IRS agents hired (or whatever the bloody number is) to control Obamacare and sic them on Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

Other than the cost of the IRS agents, recovery of dollars from the Medicare and Medicaid fraud would cover the IRS agent costs several hundred times over, the above wouldn't have cost us a dime and would have made figuring out what exactly needed to be fixed more clear. I have never gotten a satisfactory answer.

[aztek]

i think there are a lot of factors involved, a lot more than we even realise, but eve those that we do realise affect each other in many ways, and sometimes, or often, this does not work like we think it logically should,

[Merc14]

i think there are a lot of factors involved, a lot more than we even realise, but eve those that we do realise affect each other in many ways, and sometimes, or often, this does not work like we think it logically should,

Yes but trying the free stuff first and then evaluating the results seems like a modest and eminently logical thing to do before sending in the wrecking balls. There is a reason why Obamacare was enacted but I'll let you figure that out for yourself, just realize it was a means to a not yet realized end.

[Leonardo]

What a load of ****e. Deregulating the airlines certainly proves you wrong so why don't you go back and learn basic economics.

Apples and oranges, Merc. The industry is an international concern, so naturally the ability of the large number of non-US based/owned/operated companies have the ability to force prices down through lower labour costs, different tax regulations, etc.

However, the healthcare providers in the US are all US-based/operated, and the vast majority of them are US-owned.

So, it seems your "basic economics" knowledge is the one that is lacking.

The medical industry is one of the most heavily regulated in the United States and the economics of patient care is mainly driven by Medicare and Medicaid. Also, Insurers are not allowed to compete across state lines which is even more of the regulation you say doesn't exist. Then we have the legal side of the coin which is allowed to rampantly sue for malpractice and rates unseen in the rest of the world.

Medicare and Medicaid only provides assistance to a narrow segment of US society, and has little impact on the overall "economics of patient care". As for the healthcare industry being "one of the most heavily regulated" - does that regulation include how much they are allowed to charge for various procedures? No, I thought not.

As I said, if socialised healthcare is intended to lower the cost to the end-user - which ACA should do if implemented properly - then the whole supply-chain providing services in that area need to come under regulation. It is pointless just regulating insurance services, because that won't lower costs so as to make healthcare insurance affordable to everyone while still allowing the insurance companies to operate profitably.

I take your point about the litigious nature of the US, but I'm not sure to what extent that affects insurance premiums so I excluded that from my argument.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Leonardo

[Merc14]

Apples and oranges, Merc. The industry is an international concern, so naturally the ability of the large number of non-US based/owned/operated companies have the ability to force prices down through lower labour costs, different tax regulations, etc.

However, the healthcare providers in the US are all US-based/operated, and the vast majority of them are US-owned.

So, it seems your "basic economics" knowledge is the one that is lacking.

Careful, your sanctimony is showing and please explain how non-US based airlines were affected by US airline deregulation? Can I ask, do you even know what I means by airline deregulation? It certainly doesn't appear you have a clue

I'll rip the rest of this apart after you answer this.

[Leonardo]

Careful, your sanctimony is showing and please explain how non-US based airlines were affected by US airline deregulation? Can I ask, do you even know what I means by airline deregulation? It certainly doesn't appear you have a clue

I'll rip the rest of this apart after you answer this.

Where did I say they were? I explained that airlines based in other countries have lower operating costs due to various factors - and these aren't subject to US deregulation. This forces any US-based carrier to lower their prices to be able to be competitive. So, deregulation has little influence on competitiveness, and if the foreign airlines didn't exist you wouldn't see the competition you currently see in the airline industry.

But the healthcare industry is completely different, because foreign providers do not operate (or are rare) in the US healthcare industry - especially among the healthcare providers themselves. So, deregulation of that segment of the industry does little-to-nothing about providing competitiveness.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Leonardo