BearFan33 said:

---

ron.reagan said:

---

In one of my rentals on Texas coast I'm now paying more for home insurance than the entire mortgage payment was a decade ago. At this point I trust obamacare more than private insurance companies.

I think we might find peace in the middle east before we fix the real issue which is the cost of healthcare.

---

Need the government out of it as much as possible. New laws in the future should be focused on pulling back, not adding more layers of regulation and bureaucracy. Everything the gvmt tries to do makes it worse.

I don't know how we could do it, but private health care insurance should not be a for profit enterprise. Top priority is shareholders and executive pay.....not customers or providers.

---

If the liberals take over, you will see multiple more layers of regulation and bureaucracy. That's what they do

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

link missing?

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

link missing?

---

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preliminary Results from Ongoing Review Suggest Fraud Risks in the Advance Premium Tax Credit Persist | U.S. GAO


Sorry, thought it was included. It show waste and fraud, which should kill it. Trump seems to get that there has to be something for those relying on it and has been floating the HRA concept. I like the HRA. Questions on how it would work. Thoughts?

Pretty much sums up my post.

FLBear5630 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

link missing?

---

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preliminary Results from Ongoing Review Suggest Fraud Risks in the Advance Premium Tax Credit Persist | U.S. GAO


Sorry, thought it was included. It show waste and fraud, which should kill it. Trump seems to get that there has to be something for those relying on it and has been floating the HRA concept. I like the HRA. Questions on how it would work. Thoughts?

Pretty much sums up my post.

---

HSA as it stands would be more difficult to ensure spending is on medical only. It would need tweaks.
Monies not spent would be saved earning interest.

Better than an FSA card type account that must be spent in a prescribed time frame. FSA cards are harder to use wrongly, though.

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

link missing?

---

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preliminary Results from Ongoing Review Suggest Fraud Risks in the Advance Premium Tax Credit Persist | U.S. GAO


Sorry, thought it was included. It show waste and fraud, which should kill it. Trump seems to get that there has to be something for those relying on it and has been floating the HRA concept. I like the HRA. Questions on how it would work. Thoughts?

Pretty much sums up my post.

---

HSA as it stands would be more difficult to ensure spending is on medical only. It would need tweaks.
Monies not spent would be saved earning interest.

Better than an FSA card type account that must be spent in a prescribed time frame. FSA cards are harder to use wrongly, though.

---

I am not married to either, I just want to see something before essentially killing what 23 million people rely on.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

---

I did not read your answer.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

---

I did not read your answer.

---

I actually agreed with you and posted data why.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

---

I did not read your answer.

---

I actually agreed with you and posted data why.

---

Apologies if I missed it. My bad.

The problem is consistent with every time the government subsidizing things - college being the most prescient example. When Oatmeal Brains gave the covid-based relief to Big Insurance, they just raised their prices to match it. If the subsidies go away, the premiums will drop. That's why the free market always works and is efficient.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

---

I did not read your answer.

---

I actually agreed with you and posted data why.

---

Apologies if I missed it. My bad.

The problem is consistent with every time the government subsidizing things - college being the most prescient example. When Oatmeal Brains gave the covid-based relief to Big Insurance, they just raised their prices to match it. If the subsidies go away, the premiums will drop. That's why the free market always works and is efficient.

---

That may be true, but there is a need on this item. I would make the argument that Health Coverage is becoming a utility not an option. The downside of non-coverage is too great and the numbers that can't afford it are becoming too high. I am glad that Trump and GOP seems to recognize they can't just kill Obamacare without an alternative.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

william said:

---

Trump Care - another sound sane rational pragmatic prudent well thought economically balanced idea............

B,b,b,but the Mega Lobbyists and the Hired Media warp the gullible addled "minds" too easily these days...........

- uncle fred

D!

PS: WAR

PPS: Go Bears!!!

PPPS. Viva Trumpata!!!!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

---

What is Trumpcare and how can it be implemented? Where will it be administered? What is the intermediate plan? What budget year to start?


Details?

---

How many times do we have to tell you in Engrish that the government is the problem and removing it will ensure better outcomes. We keep explaining it to you but we cannot understand it for you.

It's funny how you keep blaming Trump for the failure of OBAMACARE while not understanding or being able to explain why Democrats want to give $62K / year / person kickbacks to Big Insurance while the average cost / person / year is $14.5K.

---

You really are thick. You can't shut it off one day and say private sector handle it the next for 23 million plus people. Are you 12? You think you can just say it is now private? Everyone is just going to shut up the office one day and not come back? Have you EVER had to do anything as an adult?

Even if you go totally private, you are looking at a 5 year transition minimum, or do you let several million people die with no health care.

So, how do you do it? How do you close down a Government program serving 23 million people without the Government being involved? Or are you going to keep pointing at statistics and average costs as if that actually means something when having to implement.

---

Sure you can. Remove all the Democrat regulations. Obamacare is not a government program. It is a private program heavily regulated by the Democrats into inefficiency and failure and a way to pay of its Big Pharma and Big Insurance donors.

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

(Yes. I am a intellectual, logical thinker who uses reason and numbers to find solutions to problems. I am not an emotional hysteric who screams at clouds)

---

Yet, you do not answer. Ok, I agree with you. The private sector can do it better (although that is who the Government is paying). So, how do you do it? How do you transition from what we have to the ideal private sector health care system?

I say you extend ACA and phase it in over the next two years. You move to the private system but do not leave people high and dry.

How do you do it in an intellectual, logical way? Is it reasonable to let ACA subsidy expire with people having no other options? how do you stop people's chemo or dialysis without emotion?

ACtually, I have been asking about implementation. How do we do it? You are the one screaming free market at the clouds with no details of what you do on December 31?

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you. Let me see if I can try one more time:

1. Obamacare is a private program - it is not run by the government per se (from an operations standpoint); it is not like Traditional Medicare; it is akin to a Medicare Advantage plan

2. Obamacare is highly regulated by Democrats; that is why it is a complete and utter failure

3. Remove the Democrat regulations, and the free market will bring efficiency to the exchanges

I cannot make it any more simple. You may not agree; but I cannot explain an option using a more basic framework.

---

Yes, I get it. And doing that is great, all for it.

But, you can't do it as a knee jerk reaction or you will leave too many unable to adjust. Especially, in an election year. The piece you keep overlooking is that in order to implement, you have to stay in power. Leaving 20 million without Health Insurance is not a way to do that.

The system is built for compromise, so you have to pick your fights. This is not one the GOP can win. If the Dems get the house, it will be a **** storm.

---

S Storm coming in a couple of weeks. Just wait till people's premiums double? It is happening and it will be s show. I personally don't think HC sb subsidized by business or govt. Everyone needs to source their own HC life Auto insurance

J.R. said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

william said:

---

Trump Care - another sound sane rational pragmatic prudent well thought economically balanced idea............

B,b,b,but the Mega Lobbyists and the Hired Media warp the gullible addled "minds" too easily these days...........

- uncle fred

D!

PS: WAR

PPS: Go Bears!!!

PPPS. Viva Trumpata!!!!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

---

What is Trumpcare and how can it be implemented? Where will it be administered? What is the intermediate plan? What budget year to start?


Details?

---

How many times do we have to tell you in Engrish that the government is the problem and removing it will ensure better outcomes. We keep explaining it to you but we cannot understand it for you.

It's funny how you keep blaming Trump for the failure of OBAMACARE while not understanding or being able to explain why Democrats want to give $62K / year / person kickbacks to Big Insurance while the average cost / person / year is $14.5K.

---

You really are thick. You can't shut it off one day and say private sector handle it the next for 23 million plus people. Are you 12? You think you can just say it is now private? Everyone is just going to shut up the office one day and not come back? Have you EVER had to do anything as an adult?

Even if you go totally private, you are looking at a 5 year transition minimum, or do you let several million people die with no health care.

So, how do you do it? How do you close down a Government program serving 23 million people without the Government being involved? Or are you going to keep pointing at statistics and average costs as if that actually means something when having to implement.

---

Sure you can. Remove all the Democrat regulations. Obamacare is not a government program. It is a private program heavily regulated by the Democrats into inefficiency and failure and a way to pay of its Big Pharma and Big Insurance donors.

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

(Yes. I am a intellectual, logical thinker who uses reason and numbers to find solutions to problems. I am not an emotional hysteric who screams at clouds)

---

Yet, you do not answer. Ok, I agree with you. The private sector can do it better (although that is who the Government is paying). So, how do you do it? How do you transition from what we have to the ideal private sector health care system?

I say you extend ACA and phase it in over the next two years. You move to the private system but do not leave people high and dry.

How do you do it in an intellectual, logical way? Is it reasonable to let ACA subsidy expire with people having no other options? how do you stop people's chemo or dialysis without emotion?

ACtually, I have been asking about implementation. How do we do it? You are the one screaming free market at the clouds with no details of what you do on December 31?

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you. Let me see if I can try one more time:

1. Obamacare is a private program - it is not run by the government per se (from an operations standpoint); it is not like Traditional Medicare; it is akin to a Medicare Advantage plan

2. Obamacare is highly regulated by Democrats; that is why it is a complete and utter failure

3. Remove the Democrat regulations, and the free market will bring efficiency to the exchanges

I cannot make it any more simple. You may not agree; but I cannot explain an option using a more basic framework.

---

Yes, I get it. And doing that is great, all for it.

But, you can't do it as a knee jerk reaction or you will leave too many unable to adjust. Especially, in an election year. The piece you keep overlooking is that in order to implement, you have to stay in power. Leaving 20 million without Health Insurance is not a way to do that.

The system is built for compromise, so you have to pick your fights. This is not one the GOP can win. If the Dems get the house, it will be a **** storm.

---

S Storm coming in a couple of weeks. Just wait till people's premiums double? It is happening and it will be s show. I personally don't think HC sb subsidized by business or govt. Everyone needs to source their own HC life Auto insurance

---

I think we can move to that. I just don't see the industry reacting that quickly. It could be 5 years for prices to come into a range where people can pay their own and not be part of a Government plan.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

GAO finally came out with a report on ACA. Call me old fashioned, but I trust the GAO people's data. I have worked with them and seen their thoroughness. If they say it is wasteful, good enough for me. They have the data to back it.

Here is the link.

This is going to change the narrative, pretty much killing ACA. There will be no chance of it being extended.

So, what replaces it? Trump has an idea on HRA's (Health Reimbursement Accounts) where money is deposited in an account and the person buys their own health insurance. Can that work? Will prices adjust quick enough?

Thoughts? I have not researched enough to form an opinion besides I am glad to see Trump floating something that can take the place of ACA.

---

Why do Democrats want to give $62K / year / person in kickbacks to Big Insurance when the average costs are $14.5K / person / year?

---

Did you read the post? Once again, going off on your own.

---

I did not read your answer.

---

I actually agreed with you and posted data why.

---

Apologies if I missed it. My bad.

The problem is consistent with every time the government subsidizing things - college being the most prescient example. When Oatmeal Brains gave the covid-based relief to Big Insurance, they just raised their prices to match it. If the subsidies go away, the premiums will drop. That's why the free market always works and is efficient.

---

That may be true, but there is a need on this item. I would make the argument that Health Coverage is becoming a utility not an option. The downside of non-coverage is too great and the numbers that can't afford it are becoming too high. I am glad that Trump and GOP seems to recognize they can't just kill Obamacare without an alternative.

---

Getting more people dependent is good for democrats but terrible for taxpayers and the country.

The Democrats are just looking for more kickbacks to Big Insurance.

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

Once again, our bought and paid for Congress gives We the People a turd sandwich.

(1) Repeal Obamacare while maintaining the pre-existing conditions clause. That's all you have to do, but the GOP can never seem to get that right.

(2) Relying on HRAs/HSAs to replace health insurance is the health care version of shifting pension plans to 401ks. First, you can't save what you don't have. Second, makes the end user absorb all the risk for a gap between health care costs and what they can save allowing government to wash their hands of it.

Realitybites said:

---

Once again, our bought and paid for Congress gives We the People a turd sandwich.

(1) Repeal Obamacare while maintaining the pre-existing conditions clause. That's all you have to do, but the GOP can never seem to get that right.

(2) Relying on HRAs/HSAs to replace health insurance is the health care version of shifting pension plans to 401ks. First, you can't save what you don't have. Second, makes the end user absorb all the risk for a gap between health care costs and what they can save allowing government to wash their hands of it.

---

I use a HSA as I'm better at managing the money than some "wealth manager/private wealth mgrs. that is the biggest raquet ever. Fees are ridiculous.

J.R. said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Once again, our bought and paid for Congress gives We the People a turd sandwich.

(1) Repeal Obamacare while maintaining the pre-existing conditions clause. That's all you have to do, but the GOP can never seem to get that right.

(2) Relying on HRAs/HSAs to replace health insurance is the health care version of shifting pension plans to 401ks. First, you can't save what you don't have. Second, makes the end user absorb all the risk for a gap between health care costs and what they can save allowing government to wash their hands of it.

---

I use a HSA as I'm better at managing the money than some "wealth manager/private wealth mgrs. that is the biggest raquet ever. Fees are ridiculous.

---

+ 1

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

---

So your answer to a program that is a ****show because of the government is more government? Brilliant.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

---

So your answer to a program that is a ****show because of the government is more government? Brilliant.

---

That is a rather simplistic position to complex issue.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

---

So your answer to a program that is a ****show because of the government is more government? Brilliant.

---

That is a rather simplistic position to complex issue.

---

Facts are simple. Mental gymnastics to explain away facts is complicated. It takes intelligence to understand economics. That's why no TDSers can.

(BTW - I looked ... you never explained the Democrat kickback scheme to Big Insurance).

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

---

So your answer to a program that is a ****show because of the government is more government? Brilliant.

---

That is a rather simplistic position to complex issue.

---

Facts are simple. Mental gymnastics to explain away facts is complicated. It takes intelligence to understand economics. That's why no TDSers can.

(BTW - I looked ... you never explained the Democrat kickback scheme to Big Insurance).

---

It does not matter in an elected system. You are right, no doubt. That will lose at election time. GOP needs to get voters an option that is realistic and helps them. Elected systems are Milton Friedman, everyone operates in their own self interest.

The problem with the free market is that it has a difficult time administering things where profit isn't the main goal.

That is why we have things like utilities and insurance commissioners.

Realitybites said:

---

The problem with the free market is that it has a difficult time administering things where profit isn't the main goal.

That is why we have things like utilities and insurance commissioners.

---

Ding, Ding, Ding... Someone gets it. Health care should not be profit based. They should not be maximizing profits on your Cancer treatment. They shouldn't be "value engineering" your treatment plan and that is exactly what is happening. You cannot survive a disease in the US without health insurance of some type - job provided, Medicare, Medicaid, or some program.



Even Milton Friedman believed in Catastrophic Health Insurance for everyone, with a non-insurance based healthcare for everyday treatments.

The conditions have changed, health care is not a profit center. For that matter, neither is education. Notice the two biggest issues we have is trying to make health and education into profit centers? Like I said, I think they need to be viewed as utilities.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

As bad as Obama care was for increasing healthcare prices, it was great for getting Americans coverage. For many it was a breath of fresh air. It really saved people from a lifetime of medical debt.

I have to yawn a bit about the Republican zealots stance against it, because other than a few very specific and narrow measures, Republicans have signed off on increasing prices too.

Show up with a real plan to get rid of the ACA yet keep healthcare costs down, I will listen! But just complaining, it gets so old.

---

Read up on the history of the Bill. That is what it was designed to do. It did it. It is also unaffordable and full of corruption issues. No problem reforming it. But we are about to price millions out of any health coverage.

For many jobs, it is part of your fringe benefits as JR described. But on one hand we are moving to a mire contractor relationship with
many employees to cut this cost and get Executives more bonuses.

i believe health coverage has become a utility, not a option. It needs to be run similar to water, electricity and solid waste. Set rates that are overseen by Regulatory Commission provided by licensed providers.

Free market is a pipe dream. For one, cost is too high no one can self insure. Second, invisible hand works on a free market, but very slowly and the market must be free. We do not have that or the time. Extend and reform is only sensible path forward or it is a GOP cliff.

---

So your answer to a program that is a ****show because of the government is more government? Brilliant.

---

That is a rather simplistic position to complex issue.

---

Facts are simple. Mental gymnastics to explain away facts is complicated. It takes intelligence to understand economics. That's why no TDSers can.

(BTW - I looked ... you never explained the Democrat kickback scheme to Big Insurance).

---

True, I didn't. It was never part of my discussion. You are the one obsessed with that. I only said that the GOP needs to put out an alternative to ACA before letting subsidies expire or they will pay for it at the election booth. That is all.

You are the one that went into all the intricacies of ACA and whether it is worth it. I don't care, people need something. Even if it is imperfect, some coverage is better than no coverage. You want to reform ACA, have at it. You want a free market HSA system, do it. You want socialized medicine, go for it.

JUST DON'T LEAVE PEOPLE HANGING AND HAVING TO MAKE DECISIONS ON WHETHER TO PAY FOR HEALTH OR HEAT. Extend it for a year and phase it out. Whatever is done, and I stress I do not care what form it takes, it needs to be seamless to not leave people with little resources no options.

Take all the Tariff money and create Milton Friedman's Catastrophic Health Insurance for everyone. Done...

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Tying health insurance to employers is bananas. It is just another way to tie people down. Let the market open up for individuals. That would be a massive group of multiple ages and health condition without single payer. Let the healthcare providers and insurance companies compete. This will bring the costs down.

Keep the federal government out of doing anything but providing a place for individuals to have the policies they are considering evaluated for coverages.

---

If you end employer based health care, the entire system is going to collapse.

Between taking care of Medicaid patients where reimbursement is well below the cost of keeping the lights on and 30 million illegal aliens where the health care system collects zero reimbursement employer based health plans is the only thing keeping the thing alive.

Obamacare policies are unaffordable without subsidies and healthcare.gov will collapse if the subsidies go away.

Trump will roll out his big beautiful replacment for obama care any minute now. He promisedc 8 years ago

Slurp

here is an interesting question. how many of you rely on business and or govt to subside your HC? I pay 100% of premiums, plus a concierge doctor . just curious

J.R. said:

---

here is an interesting question. how many of you rely on business and or govt to subside your HC? I pay 100% of premiums, plus a concierge doctor . just curious

---

For me, it is a benefit from work. I will probably continue working into my 70's since I have good benefits. Why stop?

FLBear5630 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

here is an interesting question. how many of you rely on business and or govt to subside your HC? I pay 100% of premiums, plus a concierge doctor . just curious

---

For me, it is a benefit from work. I will probably continue working into my 70's since I have good benefits. Why stop?

---

I'm not ragging on ya. I would do the same thing. My overall point is that employers/govt shouldn't be in the business of HC. I was on the HC Committee for a public $15B company. think how much more competitive it would be?

J.R. said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

here is an interesting question. how many of you rely on business and or govt to subside your HC? I pay 100% of premiums, plus a concierge doctor . just curious

---

For me, it is a benefit from work. I will probably continue working into my 70's since I have good benefits. Why stop?

---

I'm not ragging on ya. I would do the same thing. My overall point is that employers/govt shouldn't be in the business of HC. I was on the HC Committee for a public $15B company. think how much more competitive it would be?

---

I agree. profit and health care should not be together.

Concierge medicine is nice in terms of getting to see a primary care physician quickly, getting them to spend more time with you than the 12-15 minute shot clock, or getting in depth answers.

It is not going to save you from the bill coming due for:

Kymriah - A CAR T-cell therapy for certain types of blood cancers, with costs exceeding $373,000 per treatment.

Yescarta - Another CAR T-cell therapy, priced similarly to Kymriah, around $373,000.

Brineura - A treatment for Batten disease, costing approximately $700,000 annually.

Luxturna - A gene therapy for a rare form of inherited blindness, priced at around $850,000 for both eyes.

Onpattro - A treatment for hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis, with costs around $450,000 per year.

Realitybites said:

---

Concierge medicine is nice in terms of getting to see a primary care physician quickly, getting them to spend more time with you than the 12-15 minute shot clock, or getting in depth answers.

It is not going to save you from the bill coming due for:

Kymriah - A CAR T-cell therapy for certain types of blood cancers, with costs exceeding $373,000 per treatment.

Yescarta - Another CAR T-cell therapy, priced similarly to Kymriah, around $373,000.

Brineura - A treatment for Batten disease, costing approximately $700,000 annually.

Luxturna - A gene therapy for a rare form of inherited blindness, priced at around $850,000 for both eyes.

Onpattro - A treatment for hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis, with costs around $450,000 per year.

---

Establish a Family Doctor, one that knows your whole family and go to them. Learned early, go to the same people and establish relationships that are beyond transactional. Otherwise, you are a number and get the 12 minutes.

J.R. said:

---

here is an interesting question. how many of you rely on business and or govt to subside your HC? I pay 100% of premiums, plus a concierge doctor . just curious

---

so, all yall paying 100% of your premiums.?

I do