Redpill me on Obamacare

Ameriretards, please enlighten me on your healthcare system. Is Obamacare actually objectively worse than your old system?

Attached: Obamacare-Logo[1].png (748x513, 60.76K)

Other urls found in this thread:

money.cnn.com/2018/01/30/news/companies/amazon-berkshire-jpmorgan-health-insurance/index.html

Not worse really. Maybe a bit better if you had been denied coverage for a preexisting condition. But really it was like putting a bandaid on a bullet would.

wound

I don’t know. Sure, maybe it helped some people who didn’t have it get access but the premiums that have resulted from it are insane. It’s really the poster child for why market-based reformist solutions do not work.

Not to mention the government sponsored cartelization where certain big insurance companies are encouraged to act as the monopoly provider of health insurance to the various states.

Not only that but it was designed to fail from the beginning. Without cost controls and an effective mandate the increased premiums are built into the cake of Obamacare. If healthy people don't pay into insurance then rates have to go up to pay for the larger number of payouts from the system. Throw in a mandate that sick people have to be given the option to buy in and you've got a recipe for disaster. I'd say it was a short term solution for some and probably did help some people but a long term problem for everyone else.

I'd rather be shot than deal with Obamacare

What are the differences? Didn't it get like 50 million people who could otherwise not afford it coverage?

it got them coverage but they still cant afford it

A mandate was the centerpiece of the policy in that it was supposed to force healthy people to pay for health insurance. If the madate was effective then this would drive the price of health insurance down through market forces (this is the theory) but when the penalty for not buying in is far less than the cost of doing so it means there is little reason to buy health insurance especially if you are young and healthy. If young and healthy people dont pay into the system and you force insurance companies to sell policies to sick people you have a recipe for ever increasing premiums. As the premiums increase this creates a snowball effect that means more young healthy people will forgo a policy and just pay the ever more insignificant penalty.

how is this any different from the implementation before

If the mandate fails, which it has, then it's not any different really from before except for the part where insurance companies can't deny coverage to sick people. While this is the "right" thing to do in the eyes of many people it means the industry has to raise rates to counter the increase in risk.

What kind of stupid mindset is this? Health insurance is supposed to work in this way, you pay while you are healthy in case you get sick. No wonder so many Americans are religious, people without health insurance must pray every day.

Haha welcome to 'Murica. The dumbest part is that when people don't have health care here they go the emergency room which is covered by the taxpayer at much higher cost than covering preventative care.

For a lot of people it's not but I think the shinanegans with Obamacare are worth it vs never having been passed at all solely for getting rid of per-existing conditions. Those things made already expensive healthcare completely out of reach if you had anything wrong with you (of course, those who need healthcare the most). It might have put a lot of diabetics and such in the financial hole but at least they're alive.

I have to applaud those at the heritage foundation, this bill was designed so that it's pretty much un-repealable. If they repeal it then all those with healthcare would suddenly be thrown into the pre-exisiting condition world, both old and young, so a lot of voters who bitch about it don't want it to actually go away. The bill does nothing yet we can't get rid of it. Real-politiking genius.

Attached: let_that_sink_in.png (446x892, 33K)

It required healthy people to buy insurance. It was a massive handout to the insurance industry to get them to tolerate admitting people with preexisting conditions. It exists because Democrats are uncreative and unwilling to serve up single payer directly.

It's destruction at the hand of Republicans should have been expected. There are more healthy people in America than there are people with preexisting conditions who cannot get medicare or medicaid. Therefore Obamacare was untenable.

Attached: ukraine cat 2.png (544x572, 77.63K)

It's so bad that the porky geniuses of America's first Triumvirate are trying to think of anything to cut their own companies health care costs that isn't a complete nationalization of health insurance. money.cnn.com/2018/01/30/news/companies/amazon-berkshire-jpmorgan-health-insurance/index.html

As an addendum to this, in Oct '16 Obamacare rates and penalties went up, to about 2% extra onto your taxes. Still less than buying insurance outright, but 2% is a lot to ask people when they get nothing from it. Voters spat this out in the form of Trump three weeks later.

The GOP is already removing the individual mandate. How insurance companies deal with it is up to them, but it'll probably mean rising rates for everybody who decides to have insurance. For as genius as the bill is, it only serves to be a huge stain on DC Democrats because now they have to justify an unpopular policy or else a bunch of people go bankrupt. Of course this could be avoided completely with a turn to single-payer healthcare or expansion of medicaid, but Dems blew their chances there.

I think they were having a hard time pushing Obamacare as it was. A lot Democrats are closet conservatives and abhor the government doing actual work.

This article [image is an excerpt from it]…

As for better or worse…I think it's way too soon to tell. What it has done so far is slashed the wages of doctors and consolidated them into PHOs.

Doctor's typically have to buy-in to remain at the hospital they're at if it is controlled by a PHO.

So overtime, it might lower health costs as the PHOs slash salaries and excess fat to grow their profit margins.

That might lead to poorer care though.

Regardless, I think the bill is more about the $$ than creating a better health care system.

Attached: gruber.png (827x192, 52.16K)

Obamacare is better than our previous system, but still 1,000,000 worst any other system in existence.

It was actually a very creative way to continue to line the pockets of their puppet masters.


It's worse, in the past people would go to the doctor, get a huge bill and fuck all would happen to them (they'd be in debt forever, which ever American already is in debt forever anyway). The new system put them in jail for not paying an extra $1,500 per year out of the $4,000 or so a working family is able to barely save every year. It's even further wealth extraction and direct money to porky.

fuck all would happen to them if they didn't pay it*

Health Insurance and medical policy is so complicated that I am immediately suspicious about anyone who has strong opinions about it.
That said, I think improving Americans diets would probably do more good for America’s health than any sort of healthcare reform.

Full disclosure: I ate 4 donuts today

careful, BO bans cops at sight.

It really isn't complicated if you're an American citizen who went to the doctor in the past and goes to the doctor now. The new system has some positives, I don't claim to understand, but it's certain more of a burden on the average person than the old system was, it certainly has been for my immediate family members at least.

All one has to do, however, is look at who created the deal and the fact that they force you to become a consumer in the insurance market. It would be one thing if the criminals who run the government diverted funds into a program and pretended they were doing good for everybody (before funneling the money to porky), instead they weren't even pretending to make this law in good faith, now they just directly mandate you to give your money back to porky.

fuggggg

There are some good things about Obamacare, like community ratings for hospitals and a shift to health outcomes in terms of payment and treatment options. Plus, Obamacare provides, for the first time, another steady funding sources for public health programs that are often underloved in this country. Now, it doesn't go nearly far enough to deal with access, cost, or equity for healthcare in America, but there are some under the radar good stuff with Obamacare.

It was shit. Anything less than Share Our Health is shit.

They can't kick you off your insurance the moment you actually need it anymore but also you're legally required to have insurance without any real effort to guarantee it's actually something you can realistically afford so uh, better in some ways, worse in other ways, whether it's OVERALL better or worse is basically a matter of your own valuation of different aspects of it

What's that?

Better than nothing. I'd rather have single payer.

It’s slightly better, but not much. I actually have healthcare despite being dirt poor