Author Topic: What comes after the ACA?  (Read 687882 times)

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #500 on: January 17, 2017, 08:37:45 AM »
By definition, insurers collectivize risk.  That's the nature of their product, but some people oppose it on philosophical grounds because it seems contrary to our American "rugged individualism".  This is exactly why so many conservatives like the idea of high risk pools.  By dividing everyone up into different premium categories, and lumping people of similar risks together, we move incrementally closer to having risk pools of one person each.  In that end-member case, each person pays their own costs and ignores everyone else, which is the conservative ideal but is definitely not insurance.

Sure but financial security instruments that handle uncertainty don't run counter to the free market. I guess if we could all predict with 100% certainty what our lifetime medical costs would be, then the free market would have no place for insurance. Until then, medical insurance seems like a logical result of a free market to me.

The rest of your post I agree with.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #501 on: January 17, 2017, 08:55:23 AM »
Sure but financial security instruments that handle uncertainty don't run counter to the free market.

I think that CDOs are just as counter to free market principles as are health insurance policies, which is to say "not at all."   

But conservatives disagree with me.  They seem to think that health insurance policies, by collecting premiums from people who end up not needing insurance and then distributing to the unlucky few who do need insurance, are fundamentally contrary to American ideals.  Apparently, those ideals don't include compassion, or kindness, or even index funds.

rtrnow

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 323
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #502 on: January 17, 2017, 09:06:11 AM »

 Everyone know someone or even a couple of people that the ACA "helped". I live everyday within a system that now has to look at what we are allowed to do rather than what we should do for the patient. If their insurance won't pay, how can we justify doing something when we know it will result in a huge bill for the patient? -- we give them the options that their insurance tells us they will cover. It's a monumental change in how medical care is being practiced.

From a consumer standpoint, my health insurance premiums have increased, my co-pays have increased, I am now charged for having my working spouse on my insurance (because he could get his through his employer) and the coverage has decreased.  I and everyone else in my healthcare system (10,000 or more employees) is paying more for less.  And this same thing was happening in the other hospital system I worked for (another 10,000 employees).  So, there's 20,000 people who's insurance deteriorated due to the ACA.

I'll call bs on this. Are you saying insurance was not dictating what care would be provided before the ACA? You have to know that's not true. I argued constantly with insurance before the ACA and that didn't change after.

As to your other point, maybe take a look at the millions of us who didn't have employer sponsored insurance.

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2708
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #503 on: January 17, 2017, 09:26:10 AM »
EMTALA (signed into law by president Reagan and massively popular then/now) precludes a true free market - you will get emergency care whether you can pay or not, period.

So folks, we already have socialized medicine. Either propose repealing EMTALA and deal with the blowback as pregnant ladies bleed out at the front doors of the hospital, or else stop whining about socialism and try to implement it more efficiently - because the socialism cow left the barn a while ago.

-W

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1677
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #504 on: January 17, 2017, 09:39:09 AM »
EMTALA (signed into law by president Reagan and massively popular then/now) precludes a true free market - you will get emergency care whether you can pay or not, period.

So folks, we already have socialized medicine. Either propose repealing EMTALA and deal with the blowback as pregnant ladies bleed out at the front doors of the hospital, or else stop whining about socialism and try to implement it more efficiently - because the socialism cow left the barn a while ago.

-W
A total free market means lots of people will die outside the ER doors.  Those who advocate for it should own up to its consequences and make arguments as to why this is a just way to have things set up.  Yet I don't hear them advocating for repeal of EMTALA like they should be.  They are cowardly avoiding the true issues.

Schaefer Light

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #505 on: January 17, 2017, 10:41:15 AM »
How is this more of a free market than one in which individuals can freely buy insurance and firms can freely sell it?

By definition, insurers collectivize risk.  That's the nature of their product, but some people oppose it on philosophical grounds because it seems contrary to our American "rugged individualism".  This is exactly why so many conservatives like the idea of high risk pools.  By dividing everyone up into different premium categories, and lumping people of similar risks together, we move incrementally closer to having risk pools of one person each.  In that end-member case, each person pays their own costs and ignores everyone else, which is the conservative ideal but is definitely not insurance.

That's just it.  The whole idea of insurance (or anything that's collectivized) just runs counter to my principles.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #506 on: January 17, 2017, 10:42:46 AM »
That's just it.  The whole idea of insurance (or anything that's collectivized) just runs counter to my principles.

Fascinating.  I assume you also hate index funds, then?

Schaefer Light

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #507 on: January 17, 2017, 10:43:34 AM »
That's just it.  The whole idea of insurance (or anything that's collectivized) just runs counter to my principles.

Fascinating.  I assume you also hate index funds, then?

No.  I can profit from them ;).

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #508 on: January 17, 2017, 10:50:32 AM »
That's just it.  The whole idea of insurance (or anything that's collectivized) just runs counter to my principles.

Fascinating.  I assume you also hate index funds, then?

No.  I can profit from them ;).

How about social security?

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2708
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #509 on: January 17, 2017, 10:56:33 AM »
You can in fact profit from insurance - if you get very sick and need more care than you could otherwise afford.

It's a bit different wager (the inverse, really) than an index fund, but still a wager that can result in huge profits.

Insurance isn't "collectivized" anything. It's a contract between you and someone else where you're betting you'll get sick, and they're betting you won't.

-W

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #510 on: January 17, 2017, 11:06:49 AM »
t's a contract between you and someone else where you're betting you'll get sick, and they're betting you won't.

It's the same bet as car insurance (you're buying protection against having an accident, they hope you don't), your unemployment insurance (you're buying protection against losing your job, they hope you stay employed), or social security (you're buying protection against becoming disabled or outliving your money, they are hoping you stay healthy and then die young).

These are all forms of collectived risk pools, and they make sense for the buyers and are profitable for the sellers.  Index funds are the exact same thing.

CDP45

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #511 on: January 17, 2017, 11:08:52 AM »
Sure but financial security instruments that handle uncertainty don't run counter to the free market.

I think that CDOs are just as counter to free market principles as are health insurance policies, which is to say "not at all."   

But conservatives disagree with me.  They seem to think that health insurance policies, by collecting premiums from people who end up not needing insurance and then distributing to the unlucky few who do need insurance, are fundamentally contrary to American ideals.  Apparently, those ideals don't include compassion, or kindness, or even index funds.

Excellent straw-man Sol, you are a partisan demagogue with little regard for reality.

Because if you're against total federal government control of the health care system when the current system is already exponentially increasing in cost, waste, and threatening to overtake the entire budget- such folks apparently are devoid of compassion and kindness.

Hey you know what? You can start helping people yourself, no need to wait on government and forcing others to contribute. What a compassion soul you are.

BFGirl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 705
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #512 on: January 17, 2017, 11:16:43 AM »


I think that letting people die is a politically impossible thing to propose. No matter how financially irresponsible the person was.

Think of it this way; We feed, clothe, and house murders and rapists, but the non-violent but kind of deadbeatish dude doesn't get emergency surgery when his appendix bursts?

I have a friend (Pre-ACA) who didn't get health insurance through his job (temp position) and he couldn't afford to buy it outright.  He was diagnosed with colon cancer.  The doctor recommended chemotherapy, but it would have cost over $100,000.  He and his wife applied to several programs, but they didn't qualify because they made something like $20 too much.  As he was being told he didn't qualify, they brought in the prisoner from the jail for his chemotherapy.  He and his wife joked that he should commit a crime so that he could get healthcare.  He elected to forego chemo (they are still paying the bills from his surgery).  Fortunately his cancer has not recurred and he now has a job with health insurance.  This situation is one of the reasons why my thinking changed and I now believe we need a universal system.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #513 on: January 17, 2017, 11:27:34 AM »
Hey you know what? You can start helping people yourself, no need to wait on government and forcing others to contribute. What a compassion soul you are.

You have no idea what my charitable contributions are.  And even if they were 100% of my income, that would not change my perspective on what protections the US government should provide to US citizens. 

Look, you already have government insurance provided to you through your taxes. You have accepted this fact and never once complained.  Why are people so bent out of shape about health insurance, but not OASDI?

It's now come up a few different times in this thread... and I feel like this ongoing argument of what defines "insurance" is a sideshow to the larger questions here.  If we had single payer, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. 

Single payer is still insurance, it's just insurance provided without a profit motive, by Uncle Sam, with premiums paid by your taxes.

Gal2016

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • FIRE - 2031
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #514 on: January 17, 2017, 12:24:50 PM »

 Everyone know someone or even a couple of people that the ACA "helped". I live everyday within a system that now has to look at what we are allowed to do rather than what we should do for the patient. If their insurance won't pay, how can we justify doing something when we know it will result in a huge bill for the patient? -- we give them the options that their insurance tells us they will cover. It's a monumental change in how medical care is being practiced.

From a consumer standpoint, my health insurance premiums have increased, my co-pays have increased, I am now charged for having my working spouse on my insurance (because he could get his through his employer) and the coverage has decreased.  I and everyone else in my healthcare system (10,000 or more employees) is paying more for less.  And this same thing was happening in the other hospital system I worked for (another 10,000 employees).  So, there's 20,000 people who's insurance deteriorated due to the ACA.

I'll call bs on this. Are you saying insurance was not dictating what care would be provided before the ACA? You have to know that's not true. I argued constantly with insurance before the ACA and that didn't change after.

As to your other point, maybe take a look at the millions of us who didn't have employer sponsored insurance.

I am absolutely telling you that there has been a MAJOR shift in care delivery, and much of it has not been good.  When every nurse (not even administration) is looking to cost savings and when doctors have to order the X-ray (x2) before getting to the MRI or CT that the patient actually needs... when we change medications because the insurance doesn't cover the one the patient actually needs or we are required to first use this medication, then this one, and then that one, before finally getting to the one we know will work for the patient (all with extensive documentation) because insurance won't pay ... yeah.  That's new.

And for the person who said their friend had colon cancer and he couldn't "afford" the chemotherapy because they made (like $20 more) than the program allowed.  I call BS. I've worked with those programs -- which, *gasp* are run by the pharmaceutical companies, that give FREE chemotherapy to patients who cannot pay -- it's not that hard to get qualified for the program.  So the friend must have had some assets or other income or insurance that would pay.  They do ask for your tax returns, as part of determining need, after all. And unless he was going to a for-profit hospital, the hospital would likely have written off the bill, anyway.  No one really gets turned down for life-saving medical care in the US.  Sure, you might get a bill and have to apply for assistance through the hospital (to write off your bill), but they're not going to withhold treatment.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4553
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #515 on: January 17, 2017, 01:34:35 PM »

 Everyone know someone or even a couple of people that the ACA "helped". I live everyday within a system that now has to look at what we are allowed to do rather than what we should do for the patient. If their insurance won't pay, how can we justify doing something when we know it will result in a huge bill for the patient? -- we give them the options that their insurance tells us they will cover. It's a monumental change in how medical care is being practiced.

From a consumer standpoint, my health insurance premiums have increased, my co-pays have increased, I am now charged for having my working spouse on my insurance (because he could get his through his employer) and the coverage has decreased.  I and everyone else in my healthcare system (10,000 or more employees) is paying more for less.  And this same thing was happening in the other hospital system I worked for (another 10,000 employees).  So, there's 20,000 people who's insurance deteriorated due to the ACA.

I'll call bs on this. Are you saying insurance was not dictating what care would be provided before the ACA? You have to know that's not true. I argued constantly with insurance before the ACA and that didn't change after.

As to your other point, maybe take a look at the millions of us who didn't have employer sponsored insurance.

I am absolutely telling you that there has been a MAJOR shift in care delivery, and much of it has not been good.  When every nurse (not even administration) is looking to cost savings and when doctors have to order the X-ray (x2) before getting to the MRI or CT that the patient actually needs... when we change medications because the insurance doesn't cover the one the patient actually needs or we are required to first use this medication, then this one, and then that one, before finally getting to the one we know will work for the patient (all with extensive documentation) because insurance won't pay ... yeah.  That's new.

And for the person who said their friend had colon cancer and he couldn't "afford" the chemotherapy because they made (like $20 more) than the program allowed.  I call BS. I've worked with those programs -- which, *gasp* are run by the pharmaceutical companies, that give FREE chemotherapy to patients who cannot pay -- it's not that hard to get qualified for the program.  So the friend must have had some assets or other income or insurance that would pay.  They do ask for your tax returns, as part of determining need, after all. And unless he was going to a for-profit hospital, the hospital would likely have written off the bill, anyway.  No one really gets turned down for life-saving medical care in the US.  Sure, you might get a bill and have to apply for assistance through the hospital (to write off your bill), but they're not going to withhold treatment.
It is in no way new that there were meds that insurances would not cover and you would need to try other meds within the same family first to prove that the patient needed the meds.
My mom represented nurses for over a decade before retiring (thanks to the ACA).  The ACA had no effect on overall compensation (she negotiated it, she should know) according to her for nurses.  Their insurance did not get worse, they did not have to do more work post-ACA than prior.  She represented two different hospital systems and her local coworkers another three.  I'm calling BS on your statements, maybe you just work for bad employers.
t's a contract between you and someone else where you're betting you'll get sick, and they're betting you won't.

It's the same bet as car insurance (you're buying protection against having an accident, they hope you don't), your unemployment insurance (you're buying protection against losing your job, they hope you stay employed), or social security (you're buying protection against becoming disabled or outliving your money, they are hoping you stay healthy and then die young).

These are all forms of collectived risk pools, and they make sense for the buyers and are profitable for the sellers.  Index funds are the exact same thing.


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk


radram

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 707
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #516 on: January 17, 2017, 01:37:21 PM »

 Everyone know someone or even a couple of people that the ACA "helped". I live everyday within a system that now has to look at what we are allowed to do rather than what we should do for the patient. If their insurance won't pay, how can we justify doing something when we know it will result in a huge bill for the patient? -- we give them the options that their insurance tells us they will cover. It's a monumental change in how medical care is being practiced.

From a consumer standpoint, my health insurance premiums have increased, my co-pays have increased, I am now charged for having my working spouse on my insurance (because he could get his through his employer) and the coverage has decreased.  I and everyone else in my healthcare system (10,000 or more employees) is paying more for less.  And this same thing was happening in the other hospital system I worked for (another 10,000 employees).  So, there's 20,000 people who's insurance deteriorated due to the ACA.

I'll call bs on this. Are you saying insurance was not dictating what care would be provided before the ACA? You have to know that's not true. I argued constantly with insurance before the ACA and that didn't change after.

As to your other point, maybe take a look at the millions of us who didn't have employer sponsored insurance.

I am absolutely telling you that there has been a MAJOR shift in care delivery, and much of it has not been good.  When every nurse (not even administration) is looking to cost savings and when doctors have to order the X-ray (x2) before getting to the MRI or CT that the patient actually needs... when we change medications because the insurance doesn't cover the one the patient actually needs or we are required to first use this medication, then this one, and then that one, before finally getting to the one we know will work for the patient (all with extensive documentation) because insurance won't pay ... yeah.  That's new.

And for the person who said their friend had colon cancer and he couldn't "afford" the chemotherapy because they made (like $20 more) than the program allowed.  I call BS. I've worked with those programs -- which, *gasp* are run by the pharmaceutical companies, that give FREE chemotherapy to patients who cannot pay -- it's not that hard to get qualified for the program.  So the friend must have had some assets or other income or insurance that would pay.  They do ask for your tax returns, as part of determining need, after all. And unless he was going to a for-profit hospital, the hospital would likely have written off the bill, anyway.  No one really gets turned down for life-saving medical care in the US.  Sure, you might get a bill and have to apply for assistance through the hospital (to write off your bill), but they're not going to withhold treatment.

And speaking of BS:

Pre-ACA never had insurance companies dictating the drugs they cover and the drugs they do not. If the doctor said a test was needed, it was approved and paid for by the insurance company. Nobody ever had to work their way up in medicines, usually based on cost, even though the doctor knew the drug that would most likely work (you know, the same one that he was paid to push).

Yup, all the fault of the ACA. BS.

You can in no way state these are new problems started by ACA. What was already driving those changes was run-away premium increases which were absorbed largely by your employer until they just could not do it anymore. Some held out longer than others, but eventually everyone was paying a lot more out of pocket. This was right around the time the ACA was passed, so those costs were increasingly pushed to the employee. At the same time cost increases SLOWED(still cost increases, but slower percentages), the percentage of the increase pushed to the employee increased so high it gave the appearance the ACA was the cause.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS




acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #517 on: January 17, 2017, 01:40:32 PM »

 Everyone know someone or even a couple of people that the ACA "helped". I live everyday within a system that now has to look at what we are allowed to do rather than what we should do for the patient. If their insurance won't pay, how can we justify doing something when we know it will result in a huge bill for the patient? -- we give them the options that their insurance tells us they will cover. It's a monumental change in how medical care is being practiced.

From a consumer standpoint, my health insurance premiums have increased, my co-pays have increased, I am now charged for having my working spouse on my insurance (because he could get his through his employer) and the coverage has decreased.  I and everyone else in my healthcare system (10,000 or more employees) is paying more for less.  And this same thing was happening in the other hospital system I worked for (another 10,000 employees).  So, there's 20,000 people who's insurance deteriorated due to the ACA.

I'll call bs on this. Are you saying insurance was not dictating what care would be provided before the ACA? You have to know that's not true. I argued constantly with insurance before the ACA and that didn't change after.

As to your other point, maybe take a look at the millions of us who didn't have employer sponsored insurance.

I am absolutely telling you that there has been a MAJOR shift in care delivery, and much of it has not been good.  When every nurse (not even administration) is looking to cost savings and when doctors have to order the X-ray (x2) before getting to the MRI or CT that the patient actually needs... when we change medications because the insurance doesn't cover the one the patient actually needs or we are required to first use this medication, then this one, and then that one, before finally getting to the one we know will work for the patient (all with extensive documentation) because insurance won't pay ... yeah.  That's new.

And for the person who said their friend had colon cancer and he couldn't "afford" the chemotherapy because they made (like $20 more) than the program allowed.  I call BS. I've worked with those programs -- which, *gasp* are run by the pharmaceutical companies, that give FREE chemotherapy to patients who cannot pay -- it's not that hard to get qualified for the program.  So the friend must have had some assets or other income or insurance that would pay.  They do ask for your tax returns, as part of determining need, after all. And unless he was going to a for-profit hospital, the hospital would likely have written off the bill, anyway.  No one really gets turned down for life-saving medical care in the US.  Sure, you might get a bill and have to apply for assistance through the hospital (to write off your bill), but they're not going to withhold treatment.
Interesting feedback, thanks.
It seems the healthcare industry is run according to bureaucracy and regulatory needs, not the patient needs. Pretty sick.
SWAMI
1 DW, 7 MiniMMMs, 1 'stache, many bicycles.

CDP45

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #518 on: January 17, 2017, 01:43:37 PM »
New thought here:

Would you expect a life insurance company to insure a 100 year old person for anything less than the value of the policy?

Now think of another market, long-term care; Is that a disaster that needs to be nationalized and cause additional financial instability to the economy or are individuals and families coming together to make the best decisions for themselves?

protostache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 851
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #519 on: January 17, 2017, 01:55:01 PM »
New thought here:

Would you expect a life insurance company to insure a 100 year old person for anything less than the value of the policy?

Now think of another market, long-term care; Is that a disaster that needs to be nationalized and cause additional financial instability to the economy or are individuals and families coming together to make the best decisions for themselves?

Social Security effectively bundles a type of life insurance for minor children and surviving spouses. And we already have a nationalized long term care insurance program. It's called Medicaid.

calimom

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
  • Location: Northern California
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #520 on: January 17, 2017, 01:59:07 PM »
The "free market" is alive and well. Here's a partial list of the highest paid CEOs of heath insurance firms from 2015:

1) Joseph Swedish, Anthem $13.6 million

2) Bruce Broussard, Humana $10.3 million

3) Stephen Hemsley, United Heath Care $14.5 million

Guess who's paying their salaries, bonuses and stock options?


GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11075
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #521 on: January 17, 2017, 01:59:11 PM »
Now think of another market, long-term care; Is that a disaster that needs to be nationalized and cause additional financial instability to the economy or are individuals and families coming together to make the best decisions for themselves?

The problem with off-loading all costs on individuals/families is that one of two things happens when they're poor:

- Keep Grandma alive at tremendous financial hardship to the family, which damages the ability of the people in the family to be productive members of society.

- Choose to let Grandma die because of the costs/time, which damages faith and trust in the system . . . and thus reduces the chance that people in that family will go on to be productive members of society.

Either way, everyone loses.

I believe that individuals and families should be freed to make decisions that are good for themselves and society . . . that's why a certain level of minimum care should be available to everyone.
My spirit animal is a tardigrade.

radram

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 707
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #522 on: January 17, 2017, 02:02:33 PM »
New thought here:

Would you expect a life insurance company to insure a 100 year old person for anything less than the value of the policy?

Now think of another market, long-term care; Is that a disaster that needs to be nationalized and cause additional financial instability to the economy or are individuals and families coming together to make the best decisions for themselves?

The oldest of the baby boomers reaches 70.5 this month. That is still a little too early to call long term care plans a disaster. 10 years from now, you better believe that mass amounts of families left to "make the best decision for themselves" will have done NOTHING, and a more comprehensive long term care program will be "in play".

BFGirl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 705
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #523 on: January 17, 2017, 03:32:34 PM »
There is already essentially universal coverage for long term care in a nursing home.  It is called Medicaid.  If a person proves a medical need for skilled nursing care in a facility and meets the income and resources tests, then Medicaid will pick up the balance of nursing home care after any income is applied. 

https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/ltss/institutional/index.html

Roland of Gilead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1644
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #524 on: January 17, 2017, 03:33:52 PM »
The "free market" is alive and well. Here's a partial list of the highest paid CEOs of heath insurance firms from 2015:

1) Joseph Swedish, Anthem $13.6 million

2) Bruce Broussard, Humana $10.3 million

3) Stephen Hemsley, United Heath Care $14.5 million

Guess who's paying their salaries, bonuses and stock options?

Really so what?  You have California commissioners and other public officials pulling in $400,000 plus salaries with huge pensions.   Occasionally you will also hear about big salaries for CEOs of charities and such.

People in power always seem to make money, in any industry.

CDP45

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #525 on: January 17, 2017, 03:41:00 PM »
There is already essentially universal coverage for long term care in a nursing home.  It is called Medicaid.  If a person proves a medical need for skilled nursing care in a facility and meets the income and resources tests, then Medicaid will pick up the balance of nursing home care after any income is applied. 

https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/ltss/institutional/index.html

Not quite universal, and my understanding if very onerous for this benefit, basically you have to be flat broke for 5 years straight, and transferring wealth is a disqualifier. Definitely not a majority who use long-term care get it from Medicaid.

http://longtermcare.gov/medicare-medicaid-more/medicaid/medicaid-eligibility/financial-requirements/

"The amount of countable assets a person can have is similar to other pathways, about $2,000 for an individual."

And of course alleviating the consequences of poor decision making is the best practice right?

Helvegen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 539
  • Location: PNW
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #526 on: January 17, 2017, 03:47:38 PM »
Something that just came up in a WaPo article, which I had forgotten. Back in the good old days, pregnancy was widely considered a preexisting condition. Not pregnancy as in "are you currently pregnant?" But pregnancy as in "have you ever, in your life, been pregnant?"

Yes. Let's go back to that. Sounds reasonable.

Forgetting to state that you had your tonsils out when you were 14 was grounds for rescission.

Too many head colds was grounds for denial.

Those were the good ol' days. America! Fuck yeah!

My BIL got denied for his own individual coverage because his wife was pregnant. @_@


realDonaldTrump

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #527 on: January 17, 2017, 04:06:34 PM »
After ACA comes dismantled Medicare plus something Terrific for Redneck Voters :)

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7882
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #528 on: January 17, 2017, 04:52:43 PM »
After ACA comes dismantled Medicare plus something Terrific for Redneck Voters :)
Given your name and comments, I can't quite decide if you are a troll, a satire of a troll, or something else entirely.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

RosieTR

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 397
  • Location: Northern CO
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #529 on: January 18, 2017, 02:09:54 PM »
No one really gets turned down for life-saving medical care in the US.  Sure, you might get a bill and have to apply for assistance through the hospital (to write off your bill), but they're not going to withhold treatment.

Well, what a hospital defines as "life-saving medical care" and what is actually life-saving medical care can differ significantly. The example I always come back to is a friend of mine who was diagnosed with Type I diabetes in his late teens. He was into music, so started a band, worked at some shitty CD stores earning minimum wage with no benefits, etc. No insurance, no possibility of insurance with a pre-existing condition like that one. He became an entrepreneur at one point, with a successful small business. He kinda managed his diabetes but you know, he had to buy insulin, syringes, and blood testing supplies. I have no idea how much it was back then, but this month I had to buy insulin for a cat (there is no special cat insulin, this is normally sold for humans) to the tune of $275-$300 for 10ml. The cat, at 11.5 lbs, gets 0.04ml/day but I would imagine a human uses much more. If it's a linear extrapolation, a 115 lb human would use 0.4ml/day, so about 25 days worth. I can't remember what the syringes cost and the blood testing kits are purchased by the vet and incorporated into the vet visits. I will guess that if the cat's diabetes costs $300 or more a month, a human would be at least that. So on minimum wage, that's a pretty significant portion of one's take-home pay. Gross pay would be $290/week for a 40 hr week-all of this in today's dollars. So, one week out of each month is going to basic "don't die" maintenance.
Suffice to say, I'll hazard a guess that this friend tried to stretch things a little. Test the blood less often than recommended. Fiddle with the insulin to make it last the whole month (25 days isn't even all of February). Etc. Maybe he had a particularly difficult manifestation of the disease, I don't know. I didn't talk to him about the details of his medical care because I barely do that with my blood relatives. What I do know is, eventually his kidneys were basically non-functional because of this. He lost most of his eyesight. He had some strokes. His nerves to his legs failed and he became paralyzed. His digestive system become problematic. Along the way, he could no longer maintain his work and at some point in this process, yes, Medicaid picked up the tab because in their definition it became "life-saving care". The United States health care system, touted by conservatives at the time as "the best in the world", would not pay for his insulin or testing or regular visits to an internal med MD, but happily gave him dialysis several times a week and MRIs for some strokes and then after his wife couldn't care for him at home, housing and care in a long term care facility until even that wasn't enough and he passed away in 2016.

He was 40 years old. Forty. Now, I have zero idea how much Medicare paid out for his care over the last few years of his short life. I surmise it was a FUCKTON MORE THAN INSULIN FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Insulin! Which, by the way, was discovered well over 100 years ago, so who the fuck knows why there are still patents all over the place and it costs as much as many people here pay in rent. All this due to the "best health care system in the world". Saying it's the best does not make it the best. If this person had been born in and lived in any other industrialized nation, he would still be not only alive, but quite possibly thriving. When a normal person dies at half his age expectancy from a fully treatable disease that lacked for nothing more than support to pay for it, it is in no way the best health care system or even anywhere close to all that great. If the ACA had been passed when conservatives were shitting a brick over Hillary's first attempt at a better system, he would have gotten the support he needed and would probably be alive today. And paying taxes.

So yeah, if the ACA is repealed and there is no reasonably decent alternative, people like this WILL die. Not just obese people or smokers...regular people who just happen to have bad luck or who are poor. This includes children and babies, and women giving birth, for those of you who think you are "pro-life" but also that everyone "should take care of themselves". You either have to accept that lack of a health care system will mean preventable deaths of Americans, or you have to support a comprehensive health care system, or you have to be OK with huge deficit spending (if you mandate health care but don't tax the population appropriately to pay for it). Or I suppose you would have to compel doctors and nurses to work for much less/free, and somehow seize pharmaceuticals from the companies that charge high prices for them. It's math plus morality. I think that the people advocating no system or a "free market" system are immoral.

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 800
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #530 on: January 18, 2017, 02:16:23 PM »
^^^ +1000 ^^^

ysette9

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2946
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #531 on: January 18, 2017, 02:21:24 PM »
Powerful story. Thanks for sharing.
"It'll be great!"

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #532 on: January 18, 2017, 02:23:16 PM »
Following the news, it looks like all of the talk about "healthcare for everybody" was just misdirection.  They're seriously proposing kicking 20 million people who currently have coverage to the curb, and then declaring it a victory.  Expanded Medicaid will not only die, they want to block grant Medicaid so that individual states can turn people away who are currently guaranteed coverage due to poverty.

Apparently the republican version of "for everybody" means that insurance companies cannot deny you coverage on the individual market, but they can charge you a million dollars per day for coverage that excludes any pre-existing conditions.  They think that qualifies as "universally available"'.

So my bet now is that they repeal the ACA by reconciliation, leaving in the guaranteed coverage rules but removing all regulations on what needs to be covered and what they can charge for it.  They will claim that this is a better and more fair system and that you will be better off if you can no longer afford insurance. 

I predict Trump and Paul Ryan bro-hug awkwardly on television at their party celebrating this amazing new plan that is so much better for the country, you're going to love it. 

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 800
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #533 on: January 18, 2017, 02:53:03 PM »
And that is exactly what we deserve.  America, you built this.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #534 on: January 18, 2017, 05:02:18 PM »
He was 40 years old. Forty. Now, I have zero idea how much Medicare paid out for his care over the last few years of his short life. I surmise it was a FUCKTON MORE THAN INSULIN FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Insulin! Which, by the way, was discovered well over 100 years ago, so who the fuck knows why there are still patents all over the place and it costs as much as many people here pay in rent. All this due to the "best health care system in the world". Saying it's the best does not make it the best. If this person had been born in and lived in any other industrialized nation, he would still be not only alive, but quite possibly thriving. When a normal person dies at half his age expectancy from a fully treatable disease that lacked for nothing more than support to pay for it, it is in no way the best health care system or even anywhere close to all that great. If the ACA had been passed when conservatives were shitting a brick over Hillary's first attempt at a better system, he would have gotten the support he needed and would probably be alive today. And paying taxes.

It's a biological, so you can't make it as easily as you can with other medications. There are biosimilar products, which are equivalent to generic drugs.

Not a defense of what happened (which is indefensible), just an explanation.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Helvegen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 539
  • Location: PNW
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #535 on: January 18, 2017, 05:50:01 PM »
Oh boy, I love being permanently tethered to my employer because of health insurance!

We sort of have an escape hatch in that we can always go back to the EU, but we really don't want to. It has its own issues, which is why we are living here and not there in the first place. Lucky in that regard, but it is ridiculous that that is what it has to come down to. People will suffer and die because healthcare is seen as nothing more than a political football. Why do they hate America?

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1467
  • Location: MA
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #536 on: January 18, 2017, 07:00:40 PM »
When they repeal the ACA, my son, who has Autism which is a pre-existing condition, will be kicked off my insurance when he is 21 instead of 26, and will likely be uninsurable.  That is a real world consequence.  The diabetes example above is another good one.  My next door neighbor has type 1 and may face similar struggles.

What really, REALLY pisses me off is all the political gamesmanship.  They are playing with people's lives to score points.  If McCain had been president and proposed the ACA instead of Obama, the conservatives in this thread would be jumping all over how great it was, guaranteed.  It was Romneys plan after all.  It was a decent starting place, and it is obvious it has flaws, but because the GOP doesn't want to give the Democrats the win, they will call it a disaster, and tweak it, call it Trump or Ryan care and then declare it a victory.  Whatever they replace it with won't be fundamentally different except in how it is funded, which is to say that the middle class and poor will pay more while the rich get a huge tax cut, which is cruel and stupid. 

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
  • Age: 10
  • Location: us-west-2
  • Bot - Do Not Reply
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #537 on: January 18, 2017, 07:07:49 PM »
When they repeal the ACA, my son, who has Autism which is a pre-existing condition, will be kicked off my insurance when he is 21 instead of 26, and will likely be uninsurable.  That is a real world consequence.  The diabetes example above is another good one.  My next door neighbor has type 1 and may face similar struggles.
Haven't there been signs that the 26 age limit is here to stay? Everyone loves it and white middle aged voters who vote Republican rely on it heavily when their kids go to college. If anything remains, that's probably it.

Roland of Gilead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1644
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #538 on: January 18, 2017, 08:59:18 PM »
That is the one big problem I have with republicans, even though I do sometimes vote republican (didn't vote trump, did vote for GJ but in WA state which really was always going for Jillary).

They are all about pro-life, abortion is murder, get out in the street and hold up signs.

then Baby is born

Fuck paying for that!  Die in the street kid if you can't support yourself.

They are a funny bunch.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #539 on: January 18, 2017, 09:31:00 PM »
Haven't there been signs that the 26 age limit is here to stay?

I think the age 26 rule will stay, at least for now, just because they CAN'T repeal it.  They don't have 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a Democratic filibuster, so they can't repeal that part (or some of the other non-financial rules, like the guaranteed issue clause).  Because they're repealing it using the budget reconciliation provision, all they can really do for now is defund the law. 

That means no more subsidies, no more expanded medicaid, and no more surtax on the high income earners.  It also means no more regulations about what sorts of things will be covered, and what the insurance companies can charge, since those rules were only ever in effect for plans sold through the exchanges and the exchanges will disappear. 

So people like golden1 will be able to keep their son on the plan, but the plan can cost any crazy amount of money and won't be required to cover anything autism related.  The Republicans will claim "no one was kicked off of their insurance" despite your insurance becoming both useless and unaffordable as a result of their plan.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1728
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #540 on: January 18, 2017, 09:32:52 PM »
Even more shocking these days, constituents know more about the laws on the books than legislators!

Quote
...(Congressman) Brady moved from one goal of dismantling ACA to another of defunding Planned Parenthood, which he said used taxpayer money for abortion.

"The Hyde Amendment," she sputtered, incredulously, as Brady continued to talk over her.  Hoppel (constituent) referred to the legislative provision that already prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion.
Transitioning to FIRE'd albeit somewhat cautiously...

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
  • Age: 10
  • Location: us-west-2
  • Bot - Do Not Reply
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #541 on: January 18, 2017, 09:47:09 PM »
Haven't there been signs that the 26 age limit is here to stay?

I think the age 26 rule will stay, at least for now, just because they CAN'T repeal it.  They don't have 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a Democratic filibuster, so they can't repeal that part (or some of the other non-financial rules, like the guaranteed issue clause).  Because they're repealing it using the budget reconciliation provision, all they can really do for now is defund the law. 

That means no more subsidies, no more expanded medicaid, and no more surtax on the high income earners.  It also means no more regulations about what sorts of things will be covered, and what the insurance companies can charge, since those rules were only ever in effect for plans sold through the exchanges and the exchanges will disappear. 

So people like golden1 will be able to keep their son on the plan, but the plan can cost any crazy amount of money and won't be required to cover anything autism related.  The Republicans will claim "no one was kicked off of their insurance" despite your insurance becoming both useless and unaffordable as a result of their plan.
Wouldn't employer plans remain the same, at least in near future, since they are negotiated as a group? Obviously that doesn't help people who get their plans on the exchange. It will be interesting to see the effect on W-2/self-employment, if it can be controlled out of other economic factors.

A glimmer of hope is that if everything falls apart so badly, Americans may start demanding a real system. I'm not holding my breath, but that'd be nice.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5307
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #542 on: January 19, 2017, 02:22:10 AM »
That is the one big problem I have with republicans, even though I do sometimes vote republican (didn't vote trump, did vote for GJ but in WA state which really was always going for Jillary).

They are all about pro-life, abortion is murder, get out in the street and hold up signs.

then Baby is born

Fuck paying for that!  Die in the street kid if you can't support yourself.

They are a funny bunch.

Wouldn't the opposite of this be "Take care of all the babies, more money for the babies!
Except for the ones no one wants, kill those bastards."?

About as useful a picture of either side...
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1467
  • Location: MA
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #543 on: January 19, 2017, 03:44:40 AM »
I am less concerned about age thing (but I am glad that it looks like it will stay for the time being).  I am more concerned about the fact that he has a pre-existing condition.  To be honest, I am not sure he will be able to hold a job that provides benefits,  so he may have a hell of a time getting affordable insurance. 

You would have to think that all this uncertainty would also be driving up insurance costs as well. 

Helvegen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 539
  • Location: PNW
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #544 on: January 19, 2017, 06:39:40 AM »
I am less concerned about age thing (but I am glad that it looks like it will stay for the time being).  I am more concerned about the fact that he has a pre-existing condition.  To be honest, I am not sure he will be able to hold a job that provides benefits,  so he may have a hell of a time getting affordable insurance. 

You would have to think that all this uncertainty would also be driving up insurance costs as well.

Generally speaking, I wonder how long the system could go on before collapse. As said before, my HDHP health insurance is $24k a year. I mean, that is what some people make in a year. How long can companies themselves afford to pay these prices, even the kinds of megacorps that I work for? Something has to give somewhere.

During the recession, my husband and I were forced into part-time work for about two-three years. Guess how many of those jobs provided any benefits, let alone health? You guessed it, zero. It was a terrifying time because I had to buy on the individual market and hope nothing would ever happen so that we would be branded with a pre-existing condition and get kicked off and blacklisted. I actively avoided going to the doctor for that reason alone. Another thing that sucked was that I couldn't even write the cost of the insurance off on my taxes, but if an employer gave it to me, oh please, go right ahead.

Health insurance is just such a mess. I had to shelve the idea of full-time RVing for now because of health insurance. Sure, I could buy it on the exchange, but any care outside my resident state was out of network and outrageously expensive. Other options, what few there were, were very expensive. It just didn't make any sense.

If the ACA blows up with nothing good to replace it, I don't think I'll ever truely be able to FIRE in the US because the only way I can reasonably afford health insurance is through my employer.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7882
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #545 on: January 19, 2017, 06:51:29 AM »
As mentioned earlier, the main reason why companies can/do offer health insurance at this level is because they save a boatload on taxes vs simply increasing employee wages.
It's also something that gets completely missed when people gripe about how "middle-class employees have not had a pay raise in two decades".  Well, they have, in the form of a LOT more money being put towards their health-care plans (because health care costs have outpaced inflation by a wide margin), but it's something few ever actually see or notice

I'm deeply and personally concerned about both the provisions for pre-existing conditions and staying on parents insurances until age 26.  BIL has genetic medical problems which would be prohibitively expensive if he weren't on his parents insurance, and as a 22 year old newly released into the world of freelance work he does not have an employer who offers health plans, nor is he likely to find one in the next few years.

Adding: for better or worse our society now requires advanced degrees (masters degree minimum) for many jobs to be competitive. Kicking full-time students off their parents health-care plan seems disastrous; their man opinion would be to take out more student debt to buy expensive individual health care plans, or go without insurance, neither of which ends well.

"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Iplawyer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #546 on: January 19, 2017, 07:29:51 AM »
When they repeal the ACA, my son, who has Autism which is a pre-existing condition, will be kicked off my insurance when he is 21 instead of 26, and will likely be uninsurable.  That is a real world consequence.  The diabetes example above is another good one.  My next door neighbor has type 1 and may face similar struggles.
Haven't there been signs that the 26 age limit is here to stay? Everyone loves it and white middle aged voters who vote Republican rely on it heavily when their kids go to college. If anything remains, that's probably it.

Yes - you'll get to choose coverage for you up to 26 year olds - but there will be no requirement limiting the cost of keeping your 26 year old on your insurance.  That is a huge difference - you'll get "access" as the republicans say, but there won't be a limit to what insurance can cost for that access.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7882
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #547 on: January 19, 2017, 07:41:31 AM »
Re: Universal Access

I found this analogy useful for those confused by the (intentially) similar terms universal access and universal coverage.

Universal Coverage is covering (or attempting to cover) absolutely everyone.  It isn't really universal coverage if more than a tiny fraction of people lack coverage for whatever reason.

Universal Access is ensuring that everyone can purchase insurance if they can afford it.  It's accessible in the same way that a BMW SUV is accessible to everyone; you can have one as long as you can find the money to have one.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1677
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #548 on: January 19, 2017, 07:56:50 AM »
If they repeal by defunding the individual mandate would remain.  I guess they will be handing out hardship exemptions (unaffordable) like candy.  Since 80% get subsidies no one could afford it, the whole market goes into death spiral.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 08:01:58 AM by jim555 »

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6670
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What comes after the ACA?
« Reply #549 on: January 19, 2017, 08:07:15 AM »
If they repeal by defunding the individual mandate would remain.

The individual mandate will not remain in effect, because they are removing the penalty for not having insurance.  They can change anything about the law that has to do with money, when they repeal by reconciliation.