It's funny because it failed exactly as those who opposed the bill said it would and they even said that the Obama administration KNEW that the bill would fail and was just using it to try and get a single payer system after it failed. Democrats said that was a conspiracy theory and that the ACA would be amazing. It's pretty clear they were lying all along. They wanted single payer, but they couldn't even get their own people to support it, so they did a measure they knew would fail so they could blame it's failure on Republicans and push for the single payer system that was rejected by Democrats.
Yeah big pharma spends much more on marketing than research. Ever watch TV news? Also I am in an office building with some docs. Those good looking ex UT sorority girls who hustle them for big pharma don't come cheap.
I don't understand how anybody deals with that sh@t without help. Thanks for the advice, I may hit you up again at some point.
I think you're giving the Democrats way too much credit. I don't think they're capable of pulling off such a plan. As bad as the ACA is, it is still better than what we had before. At least there's a real expectation for changes and improvements now, when before everything was stalled.
Is it better than what we had before? I'm not sure it is, especially considering the whole thing is collapsing already. As to the Democrats, there's not much to pull off, they just wanted to get SOMETHING passed and they didn't care that it was garbage because they know once you start a terrible government program, it almost never ends. All they ever do is expend them once they start even if they are never any good. Expanding government and completely irresponsible spending are the pillars the Democratic party stand on. Any time they can do those 2 things, they are happy no matter what the consequences.
It is better for a few reasons: -pre-existing conditions are no longer discriminated against -costs are not rising as fast as they were -and most importantly, healthcare reform is now a major unavoidable issue that is going to get attention and fixes, instead of a six decade stalemate. The marketplace is a disaster, for sure, but it has to be (and will be) fixed and the buck cannot just keep getting passed to the next session.
Costs are still rising especially when compared to the rate of inflation http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepat...osts-rise-faster-than-inflation/#64ead526ad25 I mean sure, the pre-existing conditions thing is awesome in theory but if it leads to considerable losses by the insurance companies and overall increases in rates for EVERYONE is it really a good thing?
That's factually inaccurate, they both voted against Obamacare as did literally every Republican. You're thinking about a vote to abolish Obamacare after the fact where those two voted with Democrats against abolishing it.
The fallacy in this argument is that they did pay and invest before they could make trillions. Many of the drugs that have made pharma companies ridiculous sums of money were not priced so aggressively. What has happened is a phenomenal that is a problem throughout corporate America - that you have to continually find ways to increase earnings which is either cutting costs/benefits or raising prices. This is why wages don't increase. This is why your insurance plans get crappier every year. This is why drug costs are skyrocketing. This is why you have less leg room on your flights. This is why there always seem to be new and weird fees and charges on all the services. Globalization is a factor, but the real driver behind globalization is actually an incessant need to drive profits upwards. This is why there is no fix to the health care system and premiums will continue to go up. Because profits have to continue to go up. And our system is set-up so the biggest losers are the consumers. Ultimately it will collapse. But if you think Obamacare is the problem, you haven't been paying attention to what happened before Obamacare. Obamacare didn't fix the problem. A single payer system would help in that it would give a great deal of leverage for bargaining power. This is why Medicare is so awesome for the price. Everyone wants to sell to them. But you have to fix capitalism to fix health care. There needs to be a system to give corporations strong incentive to make money, but not to the point that consumers are getting punished.
A post I almost complete agree with you on Capitalism and affordable healthcare do not go hand in hand at all. As you put it, corporations must answer to their investors first. There is no room for altruism. If a corporation does not produce, it will eventually be taken over. I do not think Obamacare created the problem. It helped many at the expense of others while not addressing the root issue...even though it allegedly promised it would. As as stated previously, if Obamacare reduced the power of insurance companies, I would not be so critical of it. I do not believe a single payer in itself will reduce costing significantly. I do believe it will stop excessive cost of medicine going up. I honestly do not care if the US is the cutting edge in medical technology. Generally its the wealthy who are able to take advantage of this new technology. Its really sad when its cheaper to go to a foreign country and get reasonable out of pocket cost for medicine.
That's really not true, advances in medical technology help everyone. There are countless poor people still alive that otherwise wouldn't be if not for the advancements in medical technology made in the US.
There's probably a better descriptive word out there, but there truly were victims of medical underwriting. Aside from the preventable problems people developed, medical underwriting also declined coverage for patients who had inherited things out of their control. Pre-ACA, the time I was covered through Kaiser was great. On the other hand, bc of my pre-existing conditions, the time that I was 1099'd as a consultant forced me into state subsidized high-risk pools ($500+ monthly), and even then, I was told that coverage was at a loss. Quick aside, it wasn't a loss bc of me. I never went to the doctor (no time for that crap), but purchased insurance just in case and bc I could afford that outrageous payment. Nowadays, I don't need to participate in the ACA marketplace, but I'm glad it's there; otherwise, I'd be spending so much time and money on emergency insurance (if I decided to change jobs and go back to 1099ing).
Of course it's a good thing, as people with "pre-existing conditions" generally need healthcare more than others and are at a higher risk for a number of other serious issues. We are in complete agreement that it's a terribly messed up system that is not working properly and has even been taken advantage of by some "pre-existing" people, but getting healthcare for Americans that need it is always a good thing. Like I said, it's time to fix it (single payer). It will never make business sense to take care of really sick people when profit is the driving factor. For-profit health insurance sucks. I expected things to get more expensive in the 5-10 year time frame as we got the sick and uninsured people into the system, but those costs would be made up 10+ years from now as the population was generally healthier and in less need of emergency and late term care. That idea got thrown out the window the way ACA was implemented as a lot of the new insured people cannot afford to go to the doctor with the ridiculous deductibles. We cannot forget that the previous healthcare system we had was a complete and total disaster as well, and at least now we're poised to actually do something about it. discrimination noun dis·crim·i·na·tion \dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən\ : the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people Before ACA, insurers could reject people for having had a serious medical issue in the past. I think you should be able to follow the logic... The investment bankers getting into the medicine market for pure profit are not adding anything productive to the system.
Amazing a post where you don't personally attack me! Yes corporations beholden to shareholders but the issue is not about making profits, it's that shareholders want profits to INCREASE. But that's not possible for one simple reason. At some point the population stabilizes, markets reach an equilibrium, and ect. When consumers don't have more buying power, and the number of consumers is not increasing - the pie does not increase. The only way to increase profits is to start cutting services and increasing prices. This is what is happening. The dot com revolution hid things for a while but now that is reaching a limit how do you increase the pie? Rich keeping their money in assets. Not investing in start-ups or job creation through investing in technology and innovation. Companies are so bottom-lined focus that investment in not what shareholders want - they want dividends and increase in share price - and will punish long-term investments that reduce margins in the short term. Capitalism isn't perfect and we are reaching the stage where it's imperfections are being illuminated.
I know this is a bit of a struggle for you to understand, but this is not unfair practice or discrimination. Insurance is based on risk. Why would any insurer cover a guaranteed loss? This is like me going to my car insurance company and telling them I want coverage but I am going to wreck the vehicle the day I get coverage. Would you go all in knowing someone else had a royal flush? Of course not. What you're asking for is a socialistic approach. This is not the same as a free market insurance approach.
Pre-existing conditions. The ACA was the first (and still only) to address the millions of people with pre-existing conditions that either did not have any insurance or at best purchased insurance at extremely high cost.
Yes exactly, because the desire and need for basic healthcare is not a choice. Most every other civilized country on the planet realizes that fact with the exception of cold war propagandist. Socialism, ooga booga!
