[FoRK] The Most Important Article You'll Read Today About The Democratic Party.

geege schuman geege4 at gmail.com
Thu May 4 22:01:01 PDT 2017

"....you are not forced to pay for services you will never need or want."

I knew you didn't understand how this works.

On May 4, 2017 4:48 PM, "Gregory Alan Bolcer" <greg at bolcer.org> wrote:

> Well since a lot of the exchanges no longer have any vendors, there's no
> profit, so they've all exited. Some exchanges also only have one vendor so
> there's no competitive price structures.  Deductibles on some plans are
> more than the plan is worth, so those plans are upside down even with
> government subsidies which only qualify for the poorest of the poor.
> They like quoting that uninsured dropped, but responsible insurees are
> paying for those less responsible, so deductibles ran rampant as well as
> premiums.  The goal was to cover uninsured, not reduce health costs. The
> second part turned out to be complete fabrication.  You can't cite one
> metric without the other--the other being a completely unfair wealth
> redistribution on the most poor and vulnerable.
> So thank you very much.  My prediction that they would need to fix it was
> spot on.  My prediction they will need to fix this also is spot on, though
> they've kicked the can down the road 10-15 years.
> So what they've done is instead of amortizing unneeded services and
> insurance across all the participants., now insurers can debundle coverage
> items and you are not forced to pay for services you will never need or
> want.  It's the first step to returning to a market-driven system.
> California, particularly Southern California, is on the front line of
> uninsured, rising costs, innovation, hospital closings, medicare fraud, and
> half a dozen other issues.  The best thing this bill does is erase the
> artificial restrictions of purchasing health insurance across state lines
> and eliminating the purchase mandate.  Those alone makes it an improvement.
> Greg
> Little bit of history from Sept. 2016.
> https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/obamacare-has-increased
> -insurance-coverage-everywhere/
> On 11/25/2015 5:45 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote:
>> Is an exchange a for-profit? What's the financial structure?
>> On Nov 25, 2015 5:00 AM, "Gregory Alan Bolcer" <greg at bolcer.org> wrote:
>> Well there's an easy litmus test.  If the exchanges or Medicaid have to be
>>> bailed out then the unintended consequences of the law have been
>>> actualized
>>> in the marketplace and it will have converted from a cost-savings law
>>> (which personally I never thought it was) into an entitlement that
>>> requires
>>> constant taxpayer feeding.  There's your test.
>>> There's been 12 that have closed so far.  Many of them after receiving
>>> bailouts.  21 of 23 lost money in 2014.  13 of 23 failed to meet
>>> enrollment
>>> projections even with the medicare expansion driving enrollment numbers.
>>> The ones that didn't make money brought in fewer dollars in premiums that
>>> was needed to pay medical claims, sometimes by multiples.  So with half
>>> of
>>> the exchanges spending 130%+ on costs versus revenues even with higher
>>> rates and higher deductibles, it doesn't look good.
>>> With the collapse of these exchanges failing under their own weight,
>>> consumers now have *less* choices which is in fact opposite of what the
>>> law
>>> intendend--it was intended to bring competition and consumer choice to
>>> the
>>> market.
>>> There you go, no racism involved.
>>> Greg
>>> On 11/24/2015 5:53 PM, Bill Kearney wrote:
>>>> my reading is that it's really opposition to Obama.
>>>> Thus circling back to my 'coded racism' comment.
>>>> I'm certainly no fan, but it certainly makes it easier to play spot the
>>>> bigots when "obamacare" gets trotted out without any actual facts behind
>>>> the criticism.
>>>>  Maybe someone can tell me how the government intends (or could) solve
>>>>> the problem of folks who don't want to work.
>>>> Somehow the words "better parenting" come to mind.  No easy challenge at
>>>> times.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FoRK mailing list
>>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>>>> .
>>>> --
>>> greg at bolcer.org, http://bolcer.org, c: +1.714.928.5476
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FoRK mailing list
>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>>> _______________________________________________
>> FoRK mailing list
>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>> .
>> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

More information about the FoRK mailing list