40 Economists Just Destroyed Every Big Republican Lie About The Healthcare Bill

Well, my employer sponsored insurance premiums increased more post ACA than pre ACA. That makes sense to me because (1), as you stated, the ACA does nothing to contain costs. And (2), the ACA requires coverage not needed/wanted. That by definition makes my employer plan more expensive, which they validated through explanation letter(s).

Still, if you can provide a credible link validating your assertions, please post.

 

Your company has done something wrong then, since employer insurance increased over 130% in the previous 10 years before the ACA was passed, and an average of 3% per year since it's been passed. Your Human Resources department didn't do their due diligence apparently.

 

They took away the risk corridors that helped to cover the losses incured by Insurance companies in the short term, and then they screamed on high that Obamacare was driving up costs.

Let me ask you a very simple question: "Would you support a bill that contained costs by capping costs on providers?"

 

You do understand that upwards of 6 million people lost their private insurance because their plans were not ACA compliant. Don't you?

 

Exactly.


The losers
The biggest losers in the Senate plans are many of those who gained the most from Obamacare:

Adults covered under Medicaid expansion: The Senate bill would maintain funding through 2020, but then make states pick up more of the tab, before cutting subsidies for the Obamacare expansion of the safety net program completely.

Middle-income Obamacare enrollees: The Senate plans would cap tax credits for earnings making above 350 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $41,000 for an individual this year. After 2020, those middle-income earners would no longer get help with their premiums.

Older adults: The Senate plan would roll back many of the advantages for older, sicker enrollees under Obamacare.

The insurance industry has fought for the wider age band rating as a way to improve the risk pool and bring down premiums for market, overall.

"We think that's important for encouraging younger and more healthy people into the risk pool. So, as you start to balance it out it will bring the cost down for everyone," said Kristine Grow, spokeswoman for America's Health Insurance Plans.

The winners
The Senate plan rolls back some of the gains higher-income people would see through tax credits under the House plan, while preserving one of the ACA's key protections:

People with pre-existing conditions: The Senate plan takes out the House provision that would impose a premium surcharge on those who lapse in coverage.

The working poor: The Senate plan fills in the gap left by Obamacare, extending tack credits for people earning less than federal poverty level ($11,700 this year) who have been shut out of the exchange market.

Right now there are 2.6 million uninsured poor adults in states that haven't expanded Medicaid. They get nothing under the ACA," said Larry Levitt, of the Kaiser Health Foundation.

Access would start in 2020, and presumably, adults who lose Medicaid expansion coverage could also get tax credits on health plans. The question is whether they can afford to make premium payments.

HSA savers: The Senate bill boosts the tax break for people in high-deductible plans in both the individual market and employer plans, by allowing them to put enough into their health savings accounts to cover much more of their out-of-pocket costs.

"A lot of employers (now) have plans that are actually priced above the maximum HSA contribution," so people end up paying for out-of-pocket expenses with after-tax funds, said Eric Dowley, a senior vice president with Fidelity's HSA business. "This would allow them to be able to pay for those benefits on a tax-advantaged basis."

The Senate plan raises the contribution limits $100 more than the House bill. For individuals, the limit would rise to $6,650 from $3,400 currently. For families, the limit goes to $13,300 from $6,750.

The GOP plan would restore the ability to use HSA funds to pay for non-prescription health costs such as over-the-counter drugs. But some employers had hoped the Senate would have made changes when it came to drugs that treat chronic diseases.....snip~

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/24/winners-and-losers-of-the-senates-health-care-proposal.html

 

It does not.......their is no mandated coverage that wasn't available to buy separately before Obamacare. And this post shows that you don't understand how insurance works.

I'll save you the post and use my chrystal ball and say that your going to say: "Obamacare requires that I carry Maternity Coverage"........

Yes it does, but you have always had that coverage. Thats how pools work. You get out in a pool and that pool covers everyone in it, not just you. So while you were helping cover maternity coverage for others, they were covering your testicular cancer coverage. The Maternity care provision was a HUGE red herring because it already existed. All Obamacare said was that they could not charge for a rider for something that is already covered in the actuarial tables for the pool.

 

Verizon is a very large employer, and they're nobody's fool when negotiating insurance coverage for their employees. I'd be very surprised if they haven't done their "due diligence".

You've been throwing around a lot of numbers. Please provide a link that verifies what you're saying. If my personal experience is an outlier, so be it.

 

I'm sure that is all the fault of Republicans.

 

they didn't loose their coverage, they got different plans.

THis has never been about coverage, its been about affordability

Verizon and many other large employers are self insured. They don't negotiate rates, they pay companies like Kirk Van Orsdale to manage their plans for them.

 

I do NOT think they understand this.

 

I have retiree coverage through my pre-retirement employer. Maternity coverage was not part of the plan pre-ACA. It is required now.

 

My sister in law and a half dozen of my closest friends work for Verizon in Basking Ridge. I'll ask them if their insurance costs went up more the last 7 years than in all of the previous year.

What numbers did you want me to link? The rising costs of insurance pre-ACA?

 

You're arguing semantics. The new plans were often so much more expensive that people dropped them altogether, which is essentially the same thing as "losing" insurance. That, or the deductibles became so high that people quit using their insurance, which again is essentially the same thing as "losing" it.

 

FACT: when #Obamacare was signed, CBO estimated that 23M would be covered in 2017. They were off by 100%. Only 10.3M people are covered.



https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/stat...ousselle/2017/06/26/cbo-score-is-out-n2346941

 

If you have supplemental Medicare insurance like MediGap or Part D, they were exempted from the requirement.

 

Obama underlings (like Jonathan Gruber, who should be tied to a tree and left to rot) have admitted they weren't designed to work. The so called Affordable Care Act (hilariously ironic) is designed to collapse and force single payer health care on America.
So the right has been handed a ticking time bomb and there really is no way to stop it from exploding in their face as long as they simply play the democrat's game (which turds like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell seem eager to do)

I agree and a small group of republicans like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Susan Collins aren't going to go along with Mitch McConnell's scam, who is one of the real villains in this story, as he wants to funnel more money to Big Insurance carriers (while average families are being buried by sky rocketing health premiums and seeing all their future plans evaporate into thin air). Nice choice, Mitch!

It I had my way McConnell would be tied to the same tree as Gruber and people could throw rotting vegetables and animal dung at them both when passing by. We know where Obama stands...it's people like Paul Ryan, Trump and McConnell who have sold out their base and played them for suckers.



Donald Trump is immune from criticism, even though he has been for single payer, because because knot headed leftists are blaming him for people dying in the streets (haven't heard that one before.... ) when, if it were up to him we would have what Barry Obama always wanted and couldn't get, single payer health care just like all the other big cradle to grave care socialist nations. And people won't be "dying in the streets" in any event and I'm sick of that canard.

Trump is the worst sort of retard who espouses his "business sense" yet also
thinks we can just wave a magic wand and give everyone wonderful lives free of charge. That's what happens when you have lived a largely consequence free life in your billionaire's bubble.

 

It would seem the left is ignoring this question.....

 

Sorry Tonto. My verizon retiree plan is administered and insured through Anthem/Blue Cross.

To your first point, when individuals lost their private plans that were no longer being offered because they were not ACA compliant, they by definition lost their coverage. They were forced to Exchanges to buy new plans which in many cases cost more than they were previously paying.

 

They must be upset that BO's Special Package only covered 10.3mil. In the meantime, the Sandman says BO care is failing, the Repubs bill would kill millions and its time for Socialized medicine.

 

I'm a very young 61 years old.

Medicare isn't in the picture.

 

Premiums have gone way up, but it is misrepresented such as in this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/10/employee-health-insurance_n_5787292.html
They state that the premiums paid by employers have not risen dramatically, but if you look at the actual reports you find that premiums have risen dramatically but not the premiums paid by employers. Why? Because as the premiums increase, employers drop their current plan for a lower coverage plan with a lower premium. Typical sleight of hand by obamacare supporters.

Where I work, the premium for a family coverage increased over 7 years from $360 to $460 in 2009, today for the exact same plan is $1,260 a month. The plan is unchanged over that period. If the rate continues to increase, the employer will drop that plan and go to a much lower premium plan - which means much less coverage.

Google "aca doctor shortage". Fewer people interested in entering the medical field due to obamacare. Lots more people seeking medical care means a greater need for doctors. Net result, massive shortage in the near future.

 

No, they just are consumed by their own greed and a survival instinct. We must consider the source, in order to understand the desired outcome. I know I'm diving into the weeds, but here goes.

It's pretty sick, that at the expense of the most vulnerable who will surely die, lol, me included, that even though the underlying reason was always there to begin with, our time is growing ever so near to what we all knew would eventually fall in our lap. And that reason is simply," human beings". It's the beast within us that evolved the same way other animals evolved, triggered by an insatiable need to perpetuate the species and survive. It's where we as a species survives by the eventual and unconscionable pre-planned death of those who are either sick, dying, elderly, or poor. That's how the species survives. McConnell and Ryan are driven by nature and their own self centered interests, which are nothing more than a survival mechanism for the species. However, in their case, they know the process can be prolonged, if they really wanted to delay the inevitable. Because, in my mind, the inevitable is a long way off, and possibly salvageable for decades, if we use our own evolution and survival skills to maintain that species perpetuation. It is very possible. We just have to get back to being civilized.
But, McConnell and Ryan for better or worse, have abandoned being civilized, even though, part of what they want to do, they have no understanding themselves as to why it is they are doing this? If I were to explain this phenomenon to them, they would laugh in my face. But, if we were honest with each other, we all know it is true.

In closing, this is the reason some Republicans draft these horrible self terminating policies of there's and impose them on the people. Half of the brain says they are doing a good thing. The other half is telling them to survive and prosper by grabbing everything they can grab in order to do just that. Even if it does come on the backs of those less fortunate. It's survival. That's what this is.

 

Tell us the lie, and we'll tell you how we are going to stop.

 

I don't think you do?

 

I can't speak to the plan options for working Verizon employees. My understanding is that the company eats more of their cost increases than they do for retirees. In fact for PPO coverage, all price increases are passed into retirees. In any case, the two are different worlds.

Your assertion, if I understand it, is that employee insurance increases are less than they would have been because of the ACA.

I'm looking for whatever clarity you can provide.