so now that the government can mandate that we buy something . . .

[kelpdiver 2]

rushmc

Given all choices I would keep what we had
While not perfect, all who needed ER services got them

at great cost to all. It has also been a motivator behind the closures of many ER centers, which again is a cost to all.

Now long before ACA, we saw annual costs that greatly exceeded inflation, and companies have struggled to manage it. Old companies that promised retirees lifetime medical have floundered (pension costs are also present here). It's been clear that the status quo has an expiration date. Whether or not ACA represents an improvement is a fair question - for those with jobs and no history of cancer, it's very easy to argue the opposite. But I think it's much harder to say that the existing 'system' was working in the whole, or would last much longer.

[rushmc 23]

kelpdiver

***Given all choices I would keep what we had
While not perfect, all who needed ER services got them

at great cost to all. It has also been a motivator behind the closures of many ER centers, which again is a cost to all.

Now long before ACA, we saw annual costs that greatly exceeded inflation, and companies have struggled to manage it. Old companies that promised retirees lifetime medical have floundered (pension costs are also present here). It's been clear that the status quo has an expiration date. Whether or not ACA represents an improvement is a fair question - for those with jobs and no history of cancer, it's very easy to argue the opposite. But I think it's much harder to say that the existing 'system' was working in the whole, or would last much longer.
Costs are increasing faster than ever before
And, the main contributors causing rising HC insurance costs are government mandated coverage’s, no cross state availability and medical malpractice insurance costs

The ACA has just exacerbated these issues for the most part. And it is not fully in place yet
Wait until the new "fees" kick in in a couple of days

No matter how you look at it
What we had was better than we now have
And the mess is just starting

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,027]

rushmc

No matter how you look at it
What we had was better than we now have
And the mess is just starting

That is nonsense.

What we had is the most expensive system on the face of the Earth, and one with outcomes not much different from those in most 2nd world countries and worse than all other 1st world countries.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

kallend

***
No matter how you look at it
What we had was better than we now have
And the mess is just starting

That is nonsense.

What we had is the most expensive system on the face of the Earth, and one with outcomes not much different from those in most 2nd world countries and worse than all other 1st world countries.

Giving you this point for the sake of the following point
Regardless
What we are getting now is WORSE than what we had
And any thinking person can not argue this point

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Explain how either of these would address the issue of freeloaders like Mary Brown?

Lower the cost to entry and you would see more people with insurance. Simply supply and demand in action.

Quote

You did NOT address Don's questions at all, just a lame attempt at diversion.

I answered his question. You don't like the answer and that is not my fault. He was using A false dilemma fallacy.

You are now attacking me because... well, I can only guess because it is your style.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Neither of these are precluded by presented options 1 and 3. Both may (and imo, probably) lower the costs of uninsured care or insurance premiums, but don't change Don's question one bit.

He was presenting a false dilemma. There were more options that he gave and you will notice the options he gave were only beneficial to his point of view.

Quote

There's also no question that ER care costs tremendously more than regular clinic visits, so overall we pay extra for leaving that as the only option for the uninsured.

And if we allowed competition (point one I made) and had a published billed rate for services (point number two), then people would be more likely to get care sooner instead of waiting for it to become an emergency.

[kallend 2,027]

DaVinci

Quote

Explain how either of these would address the issue of freeloaders like Mary Brown?

Lower the cost to entry and you would see more people with insurance. Simply supply and demand in action.

More evasion. How EXACTLY are you going to do that?

Mary Brown was against buying insurance although she could well afford it. Right up until the time the got sick and stiffed her doctors (who then, no doubt, passed the costs along to the rest of us). Supply and demand doesn't work for freeloaders.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

kallend

***

Quote

Explain how either of these would address the issue of freeloaders like Mary Brown?

Lower the cost to entry and you would see more people with insurance. Simply supply and demand in action.

More evasion. How EXACTLY are you going to do that?

Mary Brown was against buying insurance although she could well afford it. Right up until the time the got sick and stiffed her doctors (who then, no doubt, passed the costs along to the rest of us). Supply and demand doesn't work for freeloaders.

What is so stunningly ridicules about the angel you are trying to take is

Just as many will be uninsured after the law is in place
AND
Those who do pay are paying more

This is one hell of a solution only a teacher could love


So the freeloaders are still there

They just get more for being freeloaders

No wonder you like it so much

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

More evasion. How EXACTLY are you going to do that?

1. It is not evasion if I answer your questions.

2. You need to read up a bit on supply and demand. Maybe start with something about Ford and work up to Adam Smith. But what you will find is you can't use the invisible hand if it is in handcuffs.

Quote

Supply and demand doesn't work for freeloaders.

And the ACA does not work for many young people who will be forced to pay higher premiums so a 25 year old single male can have maternity care.

[kelpdiver 2]

DaVinci

And the ACA does not work for many young people who will be forced to pay higher premiums so a 25 year old single male can have maternity care.

how many pregnancies occur without these young men?

And what's the ratio of serious accidents to young men and women? Most of the ladies could get by without insurance for "doing stupid shit while drunk" yet they pay for it anyway.

[kelpdiver 2]

DaVinci

Quote

Neither of these are precluded by presented options 1 and 3. Both may (and imo, probably) lower the costs of uninsured care or insurance premiums, but don't change Don's question one bit.

He was presenting a false dilemma. There were more options that he gave and you will notice the options he gave were only beneficial to his point of view.

Calling it a false dilemma doesn't make it one. I've yet to see the alternate options (and no, intrastate and published rates are not such) that you insist exist and aren't being allowed.

Generally when someone screams "unfair! I won't answer" without supplying options 4, 5, etc, it means they don't have a reply ready, and may never.

The idea of just paying as you go for medical services provided can work for routine care, but falls apart for any significant event. A shockingly high number of people live paycheck to paycheck and use their credit card for any overage. Few have the 3-6 month emergency fund, and even that won't suffice for a major ER event.

If people saved X dollars per month for medical costs into an HSA style account, then they could be in a position to cover the moderate level events. They would still be bankrupt and not paying for a cancer or heart attack level event, but could cover a broken bone or appendicitis. But we know how Americans are with saving. No, they'd spend that money, not save it, as long as they're healthy or they can get someone else to pay the medical debt when it occurs.

[rushmc 23]

kelpdiver

***
And the ACA does not work for many young people who will be forced to pay higher premiums so a 25 year old single male can have maternity care.

how many pregnancies occur without these young men?

And what's the ratio of serious accidents to young men and women? Most of the ladies could get by without insurance for "doing stupid shit while drunk" yet they pay for it anyway.

When are you going in for your gyno example a pap smear?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

rushmc

When are you going in for your gyno example a pap smear?

And when are the ladies going in for their prostate exams?

For all the silly examples you can pick of services that men rarely to never use (but they can get breast cancer), there are a similar set that women do not need, yet pay for. As an example, Viagra was covered universally long before birth control was. Why should Susie pay for married gay men to get hard?

[rushmc 23]

You are way to serious for your own health

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,027]

rushmc

******

Quote

Explain how either of these would address the issue of freeloaders like Mary Brown?

Lower the cost to entry and you would see more people with insurance. Simply supply and demand in action.

More evasion. How EXACTLY are you going to do that?

Mary Brown was against buying insurance although she could well afford it. Right up until the time the got sick and stiffed her doctors (who then, no doubt, passed the costs along to the rest of us). Supply and demand doesn't work for freeloaders.

What is so stunningly ridicules about the angel you are trying to take is



What is ridicules about angels?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

rushmc

You are way to serious for your own health

are you really trying to advocate insipidness as a health move?

[kallend 2,027]

kelpdiver

***You are way to serious for your own health

are you really trying to advocate insipidness as a health move?

Clearly he wants you to believe in angels.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 221]

kallend

******You are way to serious for your own health

are you really trying to advocate insipidness as a health move?

Clearly he wants you to believe in angels.

Which is better? 1. Believing in Angels? 2. Believing in Obama an his Obama care?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 2,027]

www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/living-poor-and-uninsured-in-a-red-state/282881/

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.