The Final Nail in the Coffin for Obamacare?

[Bengal Maniac]

You're missing the point. Yes it was broken, yes the industry was the problem. Now, thanks to Obamacare, it's two fold. It's the industry and the government. The government made it worse. The main point is they never did what was needed. To make it more affordable. You say if it's single payer, so be it. That's a horrible approach, a horrible idea and a guarantee for worse coverage at higher prices where the same people foot the bill, the middle class. No thank you, Obama and the Dems wrecked it bad enough, I don't want it even worse.

For what it's worth, I don't like what's being presented as "Repeal & Replace" either for the same reasons.

 

 

I get your point I'm not just not so sure I agree with your point. The cost doesn't matter to me if everyone gets coverage that should get coverage and that wants and needs it. Now if someone doesn't want coverage I don't think we should force. I have no problem making the ultra wealthy or even wealthy by a big portion of this.

[Run To State]

I get your point I'm not just not so sure I agree with your point. The cost doesn't matter to me if everyone gets coverage that should get coverage and that wants and needs it. Now if someone doesn't want coverage I don't think we should force. I have no problem making the ultra wealthy or even wealthy by a big portion of this.

 

I don't want the middle class paying for it. I don't want worse coverage. I don't want the government in my life to the point they will be if it's single payer. What will single-payer do to rein in cost? We all know nothing gets cheaper under the government. How can you be for worse for more cost?

[Bengal Maniac]

I don't want the middle class paying for it. I don't want worse coverage. I don't want the government in my life to the point they will be if it's single payer. What will single-payer do to rein in cost? We all know nothing gets cheaper under the government. How can you be for worse for more cost?

 

If everyone is covered, it isn't worse IMO. The cost is secondary. Everyone having healthcare that wants and needs it is primary. Yes I believe they will make middle class pay for it, but they shouldn't.

[Bluegrasscard]

A chart of relevance - HC as percent of GDP.

 

Health expenditure, total (% of GDP) | Data

 

Basically a little over 17% of US GDP.

 

What is the current GDP and history. Basically, a bit over 18 Trillion dollars.

 

Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed

 

Also for comparison other nations GDPs - and no other nation spends more than around 12% of its GDP for healthcare.

 

http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf

 

Basic math:

 

GDP

 

$18,000,000,000,000 x .17 = apx $3,000,000,000,000 (3 Trillion).

 

HC as a percentage of GDP is expected to reach at least 20% by 2025.

 

GDP should also rise so in the future the math would likely be something like 20 Trillion x .2 = 4 Trillion dollars.

 

Another data point is that the total Federal Budget is around 4 trillion and its underwater and will get worse since the rise in HC percentage of GDP will hit Medicare hard. In the out years the Federal budget is hammered by two things - Medicare/HC costs and....interest on the debt due the ongoing deficient spending.

 

No one group - rich or non-rich can foot this bill. It will be on all to eventually pay.

[Bengal Maniac]

A chart of relevance - HC as percent of GDP.

 

Health expenditure, total (% of GDP) | Data

 

Basically a little over 17% of US GDP.

 

What is the current GDP and history. Basically, a bit over 18 Trillion dollars.

 

Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed

 

Also for comparison other nations GDPs - and no other nation spends more than around 12% of its GDP for healthcare.

 

http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf

 

Basic math:

 

GDP

 

$18,000,000,000,000 x .17 = apx $3,000,000,000,000 (3 Trillion).

 

HC as a percentage of GDP is expected to reach at least 20% by 2025.

 

GDP should also rise so in the future the math would likely be something like 20 Trillion x .2 = 4 Trillion dollars.

 

Another data point is that the total Federal Budget is around 4 trillion and its underwater and will get worse since the rise in HC percentage of GDP will hit Medicare hard. In the out years the Federal budget is hammered by two things - Medicare/HC costs and....interest on the debt due the ongoing deficient spending.

 

No one group - rich or non-rich can foot this bill. It will be on all to eventually pay.

 

 

Health care probably doesn't cost near as much per person in most countries also. The Math can be run bunches of ways and I am not smart enough to know the difference.

 

Botton line goal for me and I don't care the cost. Eeryone that wants and needs healthcare gets it. They should pay what is affordable. how that is legislated I am very open to It could be taxes or regulations on the price and costs of care, recovery, drugs, Medicaid/Medicare or I would even support I pay for basic care (Dr. visits, drugs up to X $ per month) and all critical $$ to be legislated is covered under insurance at an affordable cost. Maybe a combo of these. I don't have those answers, but one I woud not accept would be some people do not get care that want or need it.

 

I realize others do not want to tax people, to insure everyone even if they want or need it, etc. It really is a philosophical mindset that is different. Work it out. The "all or nothing" mindset is the demise of democracy and its intent.

[Pioneer.Pride]

So, the GOP proposal for ObamaCare replacement has died in the senate. Senators who could get reelected if they were a dung pile as long as they had an R next to their name (Yeah, you Rand!) decided the GOP replacement was "too liberal" . Moderate GOP senators who depend on some liberal support could not vote for the replacement, because, it would mean getting a real job in the real world.

 

So where does that leave us? Millennials will continue to pay the tax penalty rather than be insured. Employers will continue to manipulate employees to avoid offering health care benefits. Insurers will continue to bail on the provider marketplace because the only folks in the pool are high risk.

 

Everything government touches just becomes a money sink hole that provides little or no value for the billions poured in. The best thing government could do is remove regulatory restrictions and stay out of the way of commerce.

[Bluegrasscard]

Health care probably doesn't cost near as much per person in most countries also. The Math can be run bunches of ways and I am not smart enough to know the difference.

 

Botton line goal for me and I don't care the cost. Eeryone that wants and needs healthcare gets it. They should pay what is affordable. how that is legislated I am very open to It could be taxes or regulations on the price and costs of care, recovery, drugs, Medicaid/Medicare or I would even support I pay for basic care (Dr. visits, drugs up to X $ per month) and all critical $$ to be legislated is covered under insurance at an affordable cost. Maybe a combo of these. I don't have those answers, but one I woud not accept would be some people do not get care that want or need it.

 

I realize others do not want to tax people, to insure everyone even if they want or need it, etc. It really is a philosophical mindset that is different. Work it out. The "all or nothing" mindset is the demise of democracy and its intent.

 

I am certainly not advocating rationing or death panels. Just indicating the amount of dollars in play is enormous. And when we talk about rising HC costs a good chuck of that cost is born by medicare. And as medicare or ACA spending grows so grows the deficit spending and that drives future interest payments.

 

We may be gone in a few years but our children will hate us when we are dead if we stay on the current path. Because they will be enslaved with debt.

 

Chart 4 at this link shows the (dire) future:

 

Eight Charts that Show the Growth in Government - The Budget Book

 

The entire structure needs to be revamped. But that is not happening. Can you see McConnell leading that? (OK, quit laughing). ACA did not really change much structurally. It had some good things that make it popular, but financially its as broken as it was before ACA, and worse. All in a goal to get our kids to pay into this broken system under government threat.

[Hellcats]

No shocker I'm with @Bengal Maniac on this: I just want people to be covered. If that starts out with national catastrophic insurance or goes to all out single-payer.

 

Middle class always loses in the current system that is just propping up insurance companies. When bad luck can bankrupt hard working folks we got problems.

[Bluegrasscard]

So, the GOP proposal for ObamaCare replacement has died in the senate. Senators who could get reelected if they were a dung pile as long as they had an R next to their name (Yeah, you Rand!) decided the GOP replacement was "too liberal" . Moderate GOP senators who depend on some liberal support could not vote for the replacement, because, it would mean getting a real job in the real world.

 

So where does that leave us? Millennials will continue to pay the tax penalty rather than be insured. Employers will continue to manipulate employees to avoid offering health care benefits. Insurers will continue to bail on the provider marketplace because the only folks in the pool are high risk.

 

Everything government touches just becomes a money sink hole that provides little or no value for the billions poured in. The best thing government could do is remove regulatory restrictions and stay out of the way of commerce.

 

Obamacare light or Obamacare V2 is not what the message was during the elections. It was repeal (in total). And then the 'and replace' was added. And it had to be added since ACA is now embedded in all levels of the structure.

 

The Repubs have been talking repeal for 7 years. And it does not take much to figure out that 'replace' had to be part of the equation. Ryan was a shoe-in to repeat as House leader. McConnell was going to be either majority or minority leader. So he should have been ready for this challenge. And the Trump administration - they are about has hands off as the Obama administration was in 2009. i.e. no strong leadership from the executive branch. But since this was a cornerstone of the Presidential race the administration should also had been ready to take on this challenge.

 

They all failed. The "failure to have a plan is a plan for failure" as they say. And that seems to be the case here. Before November the plan to repeal and replace should have been structured. After November it should have been a top priority by all the three functions. It should have been a total repeal with then key replace elements in lock step. Instead, it seems, the bill was just ACA light or ACA V2. It included bailing out the hurting insurance companies, tweak a few things and leave the forced purchase mandate in place. From what I know of the bill (and have not deeply looked in detail) this thing was a disaster.

 

Paul had the guts to stop it. Its not him that this failed. Its squarely on Paul-McConnell-Trump administration.

[Voice of Reason]

A chart of relevance - HC as percent of GDP.

 

Health expenditure, total (% of GDP) | Data

 

Basically a little over 17% of US GDP.

 

What is the current GDP and history. Basically, a bit over 18 Trillion dollars.

 

Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed

 

Also for comparison other nations GDPs - and no other nation spends more than around 12% of its GDP for healthcare.

 

http://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf

 

Basic math:

 

GDP

 

$18,000,000,000,000 x .17 = apx $3,000,000,000,000 (3 Trillion).

 

HC as a percentage of GDP is expected to reach at least 20% by 2025.

 

GDP should also rise so in the future the math would likely be something like 20 Trillion x .2 = 4 Trillion dollars.

 

Another data point is that the total Federal Budget is around 4 trillion and its underwater and will get worse since the rise in HC percentage of GDP will hit Medicare hard. In the out years the Federal budget is hammered by two things - Medicare/HC costs and....interest on the debt due the ongoing deficient spending.

 

No one group - rich or non-rich can foot this bill. It will be on all to eventually pay.

 

Observations in looking at these links:

 

1. US healthcare cost has been significantly higher than other nations for at least the last 20 years.

 

2. Healthcare cost was increasing dramatically before Obamacare.

 

3. Health care cost is not increasing. It has leveled under Obamacare.

[Science Friction]

No shocker I'm with @Bengal Maniac on this: I just want people to be covered. If that starts out with national catastrophic insurance or goes to all out single-payer.

 

Middle class always loses in the current system that is just propping up insurance companies. When bad luck can bankrupt hard working folks we got problems.

 

No shocker again. Make it a triumvirate. I'm with you two. Everyone should be covered.

[Hellcats]

No shocker again. Make it a triumvirate. I'm with you two. Everyone should be covered.

 

One of the few instances where I agreed with candidate Trump.

[Bluegrasscard]

Observations in looking at these links:

 

1. US healthcare cost has been significantly higher than other nations for at least the last 20 years.

 

2. Healthcare cost was increasing dramatically before Obamacare.

 

3. Health care cost is not increasing. It has leveled under Obamacare.

 

I did notice that but hard to read since this data is (self-promoting) government statistics. We know that end consumer cost - premiums - have not leveled off and are rising in some form for all.

 

I am also looking at a medical bill right now. Where the base charge is $2,400. The insurance company 'adjustment' is -$1,600. The adjustment is the 'discount' negotiated by insurance company and its well over 50%. I think this is where a good chuck of th problem lies with the American system. But that will take more than one post to sort out.

[Voice of Reason]

I did notice that but hard to read since this data is (self-promoting) government statistics. We know that end consumer cost - premiums - have not leveled off and are rising in some form for all.

 

I am also looking at a medical bill right now. Where the base charge is $2,400. The insurance company 'adjustment' is -$1,600. The adjustment is the 'discount' negotiated by insurance company and its well over 50%. I think this is where a good chuck of th problem lies with the American system. But that will take more than one post to sort out.

 

Are you discrediting the very links and data that you posted to try and make some points?

[Bluegrasscard]

Are you discrediting the very links and data that you posted to try and make some points?

 

Just saying the chart shows that US HC spending has leveled off since ACA - and that would be what the previous administration would want to report. But individuals and families across the board are paying more in premiums and deductible and total cost. So that chart a) maybe skewed by slanted reporting and b) does not represent the impact on PEOPLE.

 

BTW, some of the elements of ACA have greatly helped individuals and families who were paying for long term/catastrophic support - so its not a unversal statement. But cost is going up for the majority. Somehow that is not reflected in that WHO chart.