Page 1 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

20 Jul 2014, 11:50 am

Source

Quote:
Since the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was passed in 2010, its opponents have spent an estimated $450 million on political ads attacking the law, according to Kantar Media?s CMAG, which analyzes spending on advertising. Supporters have spent a tiny fraction of that amount. Kantar says opponents have outspent those who favor the law by 15 to 1.

...

It seems that P.T. Barnum?s maxim ? ?I don?t care what they say about me as long as they spell my name right? ? is at work here.

After controlling for state characteristics such as low per-capita income population and average insurance premiums, Yaraghi said he found a positive association between the anti-ACA spending and the ACA enrollment.

?This implies that anti-ACA ads may unintentionally increase the public awareness about the existence of government-subsidized service and its benefits for the uninsured,? Yaraghi wrote in his report, ?Have the Anti-Obamacare Ads Backfired??

...

Perhaps not surprisingly, the four states with the highest per capita spending on anti-Obamacare ads so far are Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina, where hotly contested Senate races are underway.

...

WalletHub found that he biggest changes for the better were in a mix of red and blue states. Arkansas?s uninsured rate decreased 7.10 points, Kentucky 8.35 points, Rhode Island 8.73 points and Oregon 10.54 points. Red West Virginia saw its rate drop the most: 10.74 points.


Maybe those rich Tea Party folk ain't so bad after all... :P


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
Location: USA

20 Jul 2014, 1:58 pm

They should just put up an advertisement:

Don't worry America. We expect the Chinese to pay for it, so chill out! :)


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

20 Jul 2014, 5:04 pm

There's a federal law that says everyone gets treated regardless of ability to pay. So, unless you plan on denying care to poor people, someone will be paying for healthcare whether we have Obama Care or not.

Also, having insurance actually drives costs down. The bill for my first spinal surgery was about $115k, but my insurance company got the bill reduced to $38k.

No matter how you slice it, more people with health coverage is better for EVERYONE.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
Location: USA

20 Jul 2014, 6:48 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
There's a federal law that says everyone gets treated regardless of ability to pay. So, unless you plan on denying care to poor people, someone will be paying for healthcare whether we have Obama Care or not.


I know many people who are told by doctors to "not come back unless you have insurance or money". Are you talking about emergency care perhaps ? That does not appear to extend to specialized care.

GoonSquad wrote:
No matter how you slice it, more people with health coverage is better for EVERYONE.


Government managed health care drives up prices for everyone, thus, hurting the middle class who don't get the ACA subsidy. It is the middle class that is hurt by the ACA.

Premiums will keep going up. There will be no savings. Ultimately the ACA will crash and burn like Medicare is expected to do. Perhaps sooner if our investors decide not to pay for it.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,565
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

20 Jul 2014, 9:16 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
There's a federal law that says everyone gets treated regardless of ability to pay. So, unless you plan on denying care to poor people, someone will be paying for healthcare whether we have Obama Care or not.


I know many people who are told by doctors to "not come back unless you have insurance or money". Are you talking about emergency care perhaps ? That does not appear to extend to specialized care.

GoonSquad wrote:
No matter how you slice it, more people with health coverage is better for EVERYONE.


Government managed health care drives up prices for everyone, thus, hurting the middle class who don't get the ACA subsidy. It is the middle class that is hurt by the ACA.

Premiums will keep going up. There will be no savings. Ultimately the ACA will crash and burn like Medicare is expected to do. Perhaps sooner if our investors decide not to pay for it.


Then what are people without healthcare coverage supposed to do? Just die? Any country that allows the least of their citizens die off is guilty of depraved indifference and murder.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

20 Jul 2014, 10:23 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
There's a federal law that says everyone gets treated regardless of ability to pay. So, unless you plan on denying care to poor people, someone will be paying for healthcare whether we have Obama Care or not.


I know many people who are told by doctors to "not come back unless you have insurance or money". Are you talking about emergency care perhaps ? That does not appear to extend to specialized care.


Yes, that law does apply to emergency rooms. We force those who cannot pay to get their medical attention in the MOST EXPENSIVE MANNER POSSIBLE. :roll:

I'll let you in on another secret. Doctors might turn the uninsured away, but about 2/3 of the hospitals in the US are nonprofits and if they turn people away because of inability to pay they will endanger their nonprofit, tax exempt status.

For whatever reason, most providers/hospitals have a problem filing with my insurance. When I had my first spinal operation the hospital thought I did not have insurance. They DID NOT threaten to kick me out of the hospital, but they DID try to charge me TRIPLE the insurance price!! ! They wanted that big fat juicy loss on the books.
I'm sure they were disappointed when my insurance company made them settle for a third of what they charged on that first bill.

And by the way, this was not Skid Row General, it was one of the best neurosurgery centers in the Midwest.

Quote:
GoonSquad wrote:
No matter how you slice it, more people with health coverage is better for EVERYONE.


Government managed health care drives up prices for everyone, thus, hurting the middle class who don't get the ACA subsidy. It is the middle class that is hurt by the ACA.

Premiums will keep going up. There will be no savings. Ultimately the ACA will crash and burn like Medicare is expected to do. Perhaps sooner if our investors decide not to pay for it.


I'm using a lot more healthcare than I want at the moment... Funny, I haven't noticed the government managing ANYTHING. I bought my policy directly from my University, just like always. I'm going to one of the best neurosurgeons in the country, JUST LIKE ALWAYS. And I just scheduled another surgery for next month with NO PROBLEMS. This, in spite of the fact that the hospital thinks I have no insurance AGAIN. :roll:

And, most middle class families DO qualify for an ACA subsidy. You have to be making $100k or more not to get some kind of subsidy. If you make $100k a year, you can pay full price as far as I'm concerned.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

20 Jul 2014, 11:28 pm

American are fed up with the nastiness of politics, and those attacking the ACA the most are the ones who run the slimiest and most disgusting political campaigns.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,565
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

20 Jul 2014, 11:33 pm

khaoz wrote:
American are fed up with the nastiness of politics, and those attacking the ACA the most are the ones who run the slimiest and most disgusting political campaigns.


Amen to that.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,177
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

20 Jul 2014, 11:35 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
There's a federal law that says everyone gets treated regardless of ability to pay. So, unless you plan on denying care to poor people, someone will be paying for healthcare whether we have Obama Care or not.


I know many people who are told by doctors to "not come back unless you have insurance or money". Are you talking about emergency care perhaps ? That does not appear to extend to specialized care.

GoonSquad wrote:
No matter how you slice it, more people with health coverage is better for EVERYONE.


Government managed health care drives up prices for everyone, thus, hurting the middle class who don't get the ACA subsidy. It is the middle class that is hurt by the ACA.

Premiums will keep going up. There will be no savings. Ultimately the ACA will crash and burn like Medicare is expected to do. Perhaps sooner if our investors decide not to pay for it.

No true. US residents can have cheaper health care in Canada by paying directly the cost of the treatments, and it's said to be simpler too, as all treatments are on one single bill.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
Location: USA

21 Jul 2014, 3:31 pm

Tollorin wrote:

No true. US residents can have cheaper health care in Canada by paying directly the cost of the treatments, and it's said to be simpler too, as all treatments are on one single bill.


Mexico is even cheaper, however, we are talking about US health care. It is not practical to have your doctor out of the country.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
Location: USA

21 Jul 2014, 3:43 pm

GoonSquad wrote:

Funny, I haven't noticed the government managing ANYTHING. I bought my policy directly from my University, just like always.


The US govermnent is centrally managing the ACA as we recently seen in the 'Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius' case where the owners of Hobby Lobby fought for independence from the centrally dictated ACA plans.

GoonSquad wrote:
And, most middle class families DO qualify for an ACA subsidy. You have to be making $100k or more not to get some kind of subsidy. If you make $100k a year, you can pay full price as far as I'm concerned.


Where do you get 100k income ?

It appears an individual can get the subsidy if the income does not exceed $28,763.

And one can get some tax credits on the premiums paid, perhaps, depending on one's tax situation, if the person does not make more than 400% of the FPL (federal poverty level), or presently, ~$58,000. These are just tax credits for the premiums paid though.

sources:
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-subsidies.php
http://consumersunion.org/pub/pdf/healthcare2012.pdf


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

21 Jul 2014, 4:11 pm

GoonSquad wrote:


Funny, I haven't noticed the government managing ANYTHING. I bought my policy directly from my University, just like always.


The fact that your University exists and is in operation is proof that the government manages things. Is the Government perfect managers, of everything? No. Does the perfect, flawless, manager or management system exist, anywhere? Probably not. I am thankful for the things the Government manages, but I admit things could be managed more effectively. That doesn't mean I want everything privately managed. If everything was managed privately we would really be seeing the effects of income inequality.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,190
Location: USA

21 Jul 2014, 4:14 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Then what are people without healthcare coverage supposed to do? Just die? Any country that allows the least of their citizens die off is guilty of depraved indifference and murder.


So you believe that if the government does not provide people with money for health insurance then they will roll up in a ball and die ?

Can't you make the same argument for everything ? What about umbrellas ? Won't people get wet in the rain if the government does not provide people with umbrellas ? How can people do without government umbrellas ? How can people do anything without a government worker providing nanny service for the citizens ?

The truth is that if the government got out of health care then the prices would collapse, and it would be affordable for so many people. This is how it is in India. Health care is very inexpensive, because the government does not pay for it. You are not seeing the damage the the US government is doing. It is bankrupting families with these high prices. It is making health care un-affordable.

And as we can see from the projected 110+ trillion Medicare deficit; it will bankrupt the US.

"In India 86 percent of health care is paid out of pocket by individuals". [see source 1]
"Heart Surgery in India for $1,583 Costs $106,385 in U.S." [see source 1]

sources:
1. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-2 ... -u-s-.html


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

21 Jul 2014, 4:27 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Then what are people without healthcare coverage supposed to do? Just die? Any country that allows the least of their citizens die off is guilty of depraved indifference and murder.


So you believe that if the government does not provide people with money for health insurance then they will roll up in a ball and die ?

Can't you make the same argument for everything ? What about umbrellas ? Won't people get wet in the rain if the government does not provide people with umbrellas ? How can people do without government umbrellas ? How can people do anything without a government worker providing nanny service for the citizens ?

The truth is that if the government got out of health care then the prices would collapse, and it would be affordable for so many people. This is how it is in India. Health care is very inexpensive, because the government does not pay for it. You are not seeing the damage the the US government is doing. It is bankrupting families with these high prices. It is making health care un-affordable.

And as we can see from the projected 110+ trillion Medicare deficit; it will bankrupt the US.

"In India 86 percent of health care is paid out of pocket by individuals". [see source 1]
"Heart Surgery in India for $1,583 Costs $106,385 in U.S." [see source 1]

sources:
1. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-2 ... -u-s-.html


That would be a relevant factoid other than the fact that the average income in India is less than $100 a month in US terms. So that $1583 heart surgery is unobtainable for the large majority of Indias population. You are distorting information to support your ideology.



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

21 Jul 2014, 4:30 pm

khaoz wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:


Funny, I haven't noticed the government managing ANYTHING. I bought my policy directly from my University, just like always.


The fact that your University exists and is in operation is proof that the government manages things. Is the Government perfect managers, of everything? No. Does the perfect, flawless, manager or management system exist, anywhere? Probably not. I am thankful for the things the Government manages, but I admit things could be managed more effectively. That doesn't mean I want everything privately managed. If everything was managed privately we would really be seeing the effects of income inequality.


That statement was in reference to the federal government. My university operates under the State Department of Higher Education.

And I still maintain that the Federal Government isn't 'managing' anything (with regards to healthcare). The ACA simply mandates that everyone should provide for THEIR OWN medical coverage, sets a minimum level of coverage, and provides subsidies for those who need help paying. That's hardly managing the health care system.

Hell, if you get your insurance from an employer or school, like me, you wouldn't even know the ACA existed.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus