archer wrote: I envy you Rick, you know what the left is thinking before they even have a chance to think it, you also know what the left doesn't know, add to that your knowledge of what the left will never admit, and what doctors will do in the future... Well I am just in awe.
So be honest archer, if the ACA fails because it was poorly thought out, what will liberals who now support it say when it crashes? Will you say it's the Republicans fault, Obama's fault, or will you say "see, we need a more simple single payer system"? I'm just as entitled to my opinion as you are archer, and I'd just prefer you tell me why I'm wrong rather than make a snide remark about me... which is done to deflect from my point instead of countering it.
There you go again Rick, you give 2 choices of what I , or other liberals, will say if the ACA fails. I agreed you are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what my opinion is, or will be. The honest answer is neither of those choices...... It would simply be, and has been since day one, ..... What do we need to do to fix any issues that crop up. I know single player is not on the horizon, I also know that scraping ACA is a terrible option, it would be a giant leap backwards. If, and when, we can get the two parties to work together for positive changes to the ACA, then maybe we will start benefiting the American people. Look at all the changes that have been made to SS and medicare over the decades to make it better, if the politicians would ages to do the same with the ACA, I'm sure it too can be successful.
Thanks for your answer, I didn't mean to only give you two choices. IMO, the ACA is fundamentally flawed in it's foundation, just like a house built over a sinkhole... you can try to strengthen and modify it with all the money in the world, but it will eventually fall in. Anyone who trys to fix something that they know is flawed in it's foundation is either using someone elses money or they are incompitent and should be removed from the decision making process.
My comment about the single payer is more related to the politicians on the left who will be forced to admit they were wrong in supporting something they never read, never vetted, and never considered using basic math and common sense in the equation. The only options I see for them is to admit they were wrong (never happens), blame Republicans, or say they really just wanted single payer all along. They were too stubborn to support a delay (thus giving Republicans any credit for being right) so now they have to live with the outcome and the consequences at the voting booth.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
It's no secret that I and many liberals would prefer a single payer system, we also know that in today's political climate that will not happen. So what do we do? Do we wring our hands over those things in the ACA that don't work as anticipated? Do we scrap the whole thing because it's easier to do that than work hard to fix it? Or do we take the framework and improve it to where it works better and smoother. I wasnt fond of the law from the beginning, I think I made that very clear here.... But I absolutely stand behind the liberals for pushing this law through by any means possible at the time. Once in place we have a framework to work with and the opportunity to tweak and improve it till it truly meets our needs. Without the ACA nothing would be done about our healthcare system, history proves that, when Nixon tried and failed, health care reform was forgotten. When the Clintons tried and failed again health care reform was forgotten. If this law is as bad as the Republicans say it is then maybe they will be forced to work with Democrats to make it better, cause it ain't going away.
I disagree with your assessment that the Democrats should have delayed the ACA Rick. Any major legislation like this normally has a very short window to get it done. If you don't take advantage of that window the chances that anything will get done later is very slim. Having the law on the books, even if imperfect, forces us to confront the problems and fix them, not just kick the health care can down the road
I also looked at the most expensive silver Obamacare plan offered in Colorado. Most expensive doesn't necessarily mean the best (that's why you have to shop), but wouldn't you at least think it would offer decent coverage? Wasn't the whole point of Obamacare to make sure we all get decent health coverage?
It's from Access Health. For a 40 year old it goes for $454 a month (without dental).
For drugs and medical care combined, it has a deductible of $4000 for an individual and $8000 for a family. Max out of pocket is $6350/$12700.
Copays for most drugs is actually not too bad at $10-$40. But that's after you have to pay $4000/$8000. For specialty drugs the copay goes to 30% and all drugs are at a 50% copay out of network.
Is this even insurance? At best it should be called catastrophic insurance. And get this, for a 60 year old this POS policy costs $964 a month. It's going to be very painful as you approach Medicare... :faint:
It has always been very painful cost wise for insurance as you approach medicare age. I had a BC/BS policy at age 64, and this was several years ago, the premium was $1018/month (I just looked up what I was paying back then) and it was by no means a Cadillac plan. I tried to change to something less expensive, but because of a pre existing condition I was turned down by several companies. I tried Cover Colorado and the cost for a comparable plan was over $1600/month, I sincerely wish the ACA had been around then
But wasn't the whole selling point of the "Affordable" Care Act to make health care more affordable, not less? The president told us that the average family would save about $2500 a month... so what happened between then and now?
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
If the average family gets a subsidy perhaps they will, I haven't seen anything that indicates they won't, depending, of course, on what kind of coverage they had and what they sign up for, It was not wise of Obama to give hard numbers back then, too many variables.
So it wasn't because he sincerely thought the ACA would work as designed. Not surprising that would never cross your mind about Obama, like you do with me, you love to claim inside knowledge of what liberals are thinking.
archer wrote: If the average family gets a subsidy perhaps they will, I haven't seen anything that indicates they won't, depending, of course, on what kind of coverage they had and what they sign up for, It was not wise of Obama to give hard numbers back then, too many variables.
His exact statements...
"If you have health insurance, then you don’t have to do anything. If you’ve got health insurance through your employer, you can keep your health insurance, keep your choice of doctor, keep your plan. … And we estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 per year."
OBAMA: "The only thing we're going to try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed onto you. And we estimate we can cut the average family's premium by about $2,500 per year." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks During The Third Presidential Debate, Hempstead, NY, 10/15/08)
Obama: "All I want to do, if you've already got health care, is lower your costs. That includes you, Joe." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks During The Third Presidential Debate, Hempstead, NY, 10/15/08)
