login
Defending Obamacare (Page 5)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-05-31 1:11 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 5557    , California |  Subject: RE: Defending ObamacareOriginally posted by tuwood Originally posted by TriToy Originally posted by TriRSquared the second article is still not apples to apples. the increases are a false comparison as what is covered is night and day. The new plans have NO COST SHARING for preventive services. there are minimums for coverage that did not exist in the quoted prices of previous plans. and I see your Forbes article and raise you a NYT article discussing competition in the marketplace - a good old capitalist answer: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/31/health/health-law-is-fostering-co... Originally posted by TriToy From Forbes: "There is a moral to this story for those open to receive the message. If you are among the many Americans who have bought into the fear and loathing that has been the campaign against Obamacare, you just might wish to reconsider. With every passing day, the various myths, legends and lies put forward by those with a political axe to grind, TV or radio rating to be raised or vote to be purchased, are falling victim to the facts. Of course, if you continue to find it more useful to hate the Affordable Care Act than to recognize the benefit of what this program offers to you and your family, nothing I can say is likely to change your mind." Full Article here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/24/unexpected-health-... Firstly, how can you take Ungar (a man who's byline is "I write from the left") as an impartial journalist on this issue? If your argument is essentially "If you disagree with me I don't want to talk to you" then you're not exactly the most talented debater now are you? Secondly, I'll see your Forbes article with another Forbes article. Ungar did not compare apples to apples (see the article for details). Individual plan rates in CA are going up double and triple digit %s. "As California goes, so goes the nation." As an individual plan customer in FL I expect to see these same double and triple digit % increases. The cool part is we all get to see it come to life. So far, the reality is that more and more people do not like the ACA as it gets closer to implementation and I suspect that will continue. Preventative care is important for overall healthcare, but 20 somethings and 30 somethings could give a rats butt about preventative care. What they're going to experience is being forced to buy into a healthcare plan they don't want or pay a new tax. I'm thinking that will go over like a lead balloon personally. The 30 hour workweek reality has already begun to hit and the poor are getting jacked the worse because the majority of their jobs are hourly. There are hundreds and hundreds of unintended consequences that will ripple through the country due to ACA. We've just begun to see the tip of the iceberg. So, yes there are good things, and nobody (who is sane) can deny there aren't good things in the ACA. However, there are far more bad things that the supporters like to pretend don't exist. Of course the late 20s crowd won't like it, but the alternative was really broken. Wait awhile... till they're unhealthy, or have families to support, then sign up for health insurance. It's sort of like waiting till you're 95 to take out a life insurance policy. What they COULD have done is model it after life insurance. Lock in a lower price if you start coverage when you're younger. But if you skip coverage until you're older, you get hit with a higher price when you start up. I'm sure some beancounter might be able to tell you why that doesn't add up for health insurance ... who knows. |
| 2013-05-31 7:51 AM in reply to: spudone |
Pro 9391  Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Defending Obamacare Originally posted by spudone Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by TriToy Originally posted by TriRSquared the second article is still not apples to apples. the increases are a false comparison as what is covered is night and day. The new plans have NO COST SHARING for preventive services. there are minimums for coverage that did not exist in the quoted prices of previous plans. and I see your Forbes article and raise you a NYT article discussing competition in the marketplace - a good old capitalist answer: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/31/health/health-law-is-fostering-co... Originally posted by TriToy From Forbes: "There is a moral to this story for those open to receive the message. If you are among the many Americans who have bought into the fear and loathing that has been the campaign against Obamacare, you just might wish to reconsider. With every passing day, the various myths, legends and lies put forward by those with a political axe to grind, TV or radio rating to be raised or vote to be purchased, are falling victim to the facts. Of course, if you continue to find it more useful to hate the Affordable Care Act than to recognize the benefit of what this program offers to you and your family, nothing I can say is likely to change your mind." Full Article here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/24/unexpected-health-... Firstly, how can you take Ungar (a man who's byline is "I write from the left") as an impartial journalist on this issue? If your argument is essentially "If you disagree with me I don't want to talk to you" then you're not exactly the most talented debater now are you? Secondly, I'll see your Forbes article with another Forbes article. Ungar did not compare apples to apples (see the article for details). Individual plan rates in CA are going up double and triple digit %s. "As California goes, so goes the nation." As an individual plan customer in FL I expect to see these same double and triple digit % increases. The cool part is we all get to see it come to life. So far, the reality is that more and more people do not like the ACA as it gets closer to implementation and I suspect that will continue. Preventative care is important for overall healthcare, but 20 somethings and 30 somethings could give a rats butt about preventative care. What they're going to experience is being forced to buy into a healthcare plan they don't want or pay a new tax. I'm thinking that will go over like a lead balloon personally. The 30 hour workweek reality has already begun to hit and the poor are getting jacked the worse because the majority of their jobs are hourly. There are hundreds and hundreds of unintended consequences that will ripple through the country due to ACA. We've just begun to see the tip of the iceberg. So, yes there are good things, and nobody (who is sane) can deny there aren't good things in the ACA. However, there are far more bad things that the supporters like to pretend don't exist. Of course the late 20s crowd won't like it, but the alternative was really broken. Wait awhile... till they're unhealthy, or have families to support, then sign up for health insurance. It's sort of like waiting till you're 95 to take out a life insurance policy. What they COULD have done is model it after life insurance. Lock in a lower price if you start coverage when you're younger. But if you skip coverage until you're older, you get hit with a higher price when you start up. I'm sure some beancounter might be able to tell you why that doesn't add up for health insurance ... who knows. I agree with you and I like your idea on the insurance. The sad part is it was broken badly and needed to be fixed. My opinion though is that the ACA "fix" is going to make it far worse than it was before from a cost standpoint overall. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK