Posted on 03/03/2015 5:50:39 AM PST by Citizen Zed
Mine’s been cancelled twice in the past two years and each time I selected a new policy, it was more expensive and had less benefits than the previous one. But I’m at least thankful that I can pay the premiums without government help.
And that works very well...until they determine that with administrative costs and general demand on the system that 19 percent won't be able to pay for healthcare for all. So then they raise the VAT to 25, 30 or maybe 50 percent. At that point, everyone works for the government.
Not really, no. The Affordable Care Act doesn't impact me since I get my health insurance through my employer. I know some people who have gotten some benefits from in in terms of pre-existing condition coverage or keeping kids on their policy past 21. In terms of the ACA itself, it's a typical Congressional conglomoration that doesn't work like it was supposed, as well as it was supposed to, or as cheaply as it was supposed to. But with all that, I do recognize that there are people of depend on it and I admit to a certain amount of sympathy for them.
“I admit to a certain amount of sympathy for them.”
I can understand that. Question though, any idea if the aca has impacted your employer?
“Liberty?”
There was a very good opinion piece a while back, based on the Gruber comments I think, saying that while Americans support universal coverage in principle that approval craters once told that they not only have to pay out for their own coverage but that of others as well.
In the Obamacare debate there was no discussion of there being no free lunch on healthcare. Attempts to have that discussion were drowned out by the lies over reduction of costs ($2500 per household, right?) and that you could keep your plan and your doctor.
So, should the Supremes overturn the subsidies we’d FINALLY get that debate. With accurate statistics about the actual costs involved. And it would most likely happen at the proper level of government (the states).
I think the issue is that now you can’t just “change it back” because you have potentially millions of people who have insurance coverage but have conditions that disqualify them from shopping for new coverage. In order to change it back, there will have to be some provision to accommodate those people - like some kind of mandate that the insurance companies have to provide exchange participants who have kept continuous coverage with a guaranteed right of conversion to a non-exchange policy.
Not that I know of. No change in the health care plans being offered and who they are being offered to. My premium went up, but by only 4% or so. Pretty much same as always.
There is no going back. One thing is absolutely certain... insurance companies will not roll back the cost of premiums. Not in a million years, no matter what happens.
The case currently before the court is not challenging the Constitutionality of Obamacare, so no, they should not rule based on whether the law is Constitutional. The current case is a question of statutory construction - that is, how the law itself should be interpreted.
Except we don't really have a free marked, do we?
Rabid beggars will move out of the States who did not take on Obamacare’s organizational spending mandate. No one I know has ever qualified for what they did not pay for...ie, Social Security and Medicare.
They could decide that 0-care is unconstitutional and enjoin any new accounts immediately while allowing a period of time for those enrolled in the current scheme to be transitioned to a constitutionally compliant scheme. Scheme, scheme, scheme...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.