Healthcare

[Irishize]

well the system exists so the wealthy can get preferential and better treatment.

Yes, EVERY system. So given the choice, would you prefer your current health coverage or NHS-type coverage for you & your family?

I think there’s pros & cons to both personally, so this is an honest question from me.

 

[dublinirish]

Yes, EVERY system. So given the choice, would you prefer your current health coverage or NHS-type coverage for you & your family?

I think there’s pros & cons to both personally, so this is an honest question from me.

NHS type coverage for sure, hands down.

 

[Irishize]

NHS type coverage for sure, hands down.

Gotcha. So what do you like about that system? Have you ever been under it (I assumed you had, so would love your feedback)?

 

[dublinirish]

Gotcha. So what do you like about that system? Have you ever been under it (I assumed you had, so would love your feedback)?

Lived in for 32 years of my life back home lol. Great experiences with it. Never paid for health insurance in my life. Our first child was born at home with the assistance of a Midwife Unit from the National Maternity Hospital and didn't cost us a dime. I probably am not the best person to ask as I have never been seriously ill or had any major injuries etc. but all my experiences with the system have been positive.

My brother is a Consultant Gastroenterologist, he came up through the Irish medical system and he might have a slightly different view, i knew they work long hours in understaffed departments with less pay like a US based counterpart but he enjoys the people he works with and the ideals of the system, basically they are working for the people of Ireland and not just for profit.

 

[Irishize]

Lived in for 32 years of my life back home lol. Great experiences with it. Never paid for health insurance in my life. Our first child was born at home with the assistance of a Midwife Unit from the National Maternity Hospital and didn't cost us a dime. I probably am not the best person to ask as I have never been seriously ill or had any major injuries etc. but all my experiences with the system have been positive.

My brother is a Consultant Gastroenterologist, he came up through the Irish medical system and he might have a slightly different view, i knew they work long hours in understaffed departments with less pay like a US based counterpart but he enjoys the people he works with and the ideals of the system, basically they are working for the people of Ireland and not just for profit.

Thanks for the feedback! I’ve always understood that it is a great program for realtively healthy folks. So if America is far more unhealthy than other first world countries, I wonder where the middle ground lies for America’s future in healthcare.

 

[Legacy]

So, again, which would you prefer and why?

I'd thrown it open for discussion, but would be happy to address it.

Some basic systems analysis.

System
Define the system if we consider any element of healthcare which is as general as you can get:
- individual providers (doctors, hospitals, midlevels, nurses, and assistants)
- organization or system providers - health insurance entities, drug companies, medical device manufacturers, etc.
- administration both private and public, state and federal
- anyone else that could be a cost to the system that provides healthcare or derives profit from the system.

Goals (general, may or may not be attainable)
1. Reduce costs to the system and to the users
2. Make the system efficient and effective in providing care
3. HC coverage for the maximum amount of Americans
4. Allow for a reasonable profit or increases (salaries, etc.) to the system components (defined above)
5. Address shortages in areas of need - rural, primary and specialists physicians, hospitals, etc.
6. Educate providers and users
7. Enforcement of laws, e.g. fraud

Objectives
So you construct a system that works towards each of those goals by setting Objectives. This can only be done on a federal level and the system must cover both public and private entities.

For example, medical criteria for an admission to a hospital or skilled nursing facility reduces costs, makes the system more efficient, forces providers to become efficient and deliver care at the appropriate level.

Another, an electronic medical record and digital images allow easy access to providers, and its standardization and compatibility facilitates efficiency, may reduce costs, timeliness and appropriate care.

Bundled payments for admission diagnoses with limitations on length of stay gives elements that reimburse on a standard, thereby reducing costs and making the system efficient.

A single payer system also meets many of the goals above.

Regulation of drug prices and negotiating of prices controls costs. Generic prices are set at affordable (to patients) levels. Allow importation of drugs from other countries, but they must be of the same quality.

Fraud eats up 15% of health care dollars, so the DOJ needs to control to recover billions, which is also facilitated by the electronic medical record.

Costs differ between states (salaries, property for hospitals, etc). So flexibility must be built in. Allow states to be flexible in constructing a system that addresses their needs.

Those are starters and meant as examples. You should also define barriers to these objectives and devise a system that is fair to all. For instance, you need to adjust for risk and unexpected catastrophic costs to the system. I can think of more but will stop here.

 

[Irishize]

I'd thrown it open for discussion, but would be happy to address it.

Some basic systems analysis.

System
Define the system if we consider any element of healthcare which is as general as you can get:
- individual providers (doctors, hospitals, midlevels, nurses, and assistants)
- organization or system providers - health insurance entities, drug companies, medical device manufacturers, etc.
- administration both private and public, state and federal
- anyone else that could be a cost to the system that provides healthcare or derives profit from the system.

Goals (general, may or may not be attainable)
1. Reduce costs to the system and to the users
2. Make the system efficient and effective in providing care
3. HC coverage for the maximum amount of Americans
4. Allow for a reasonable profit or increases (salaries, etc.) to the system components (defined above)
5. Address shortages in areas of need - rural, primary and specialists physicians, hospitals, etc.
6. Educate providers and users
7. Enforcement of laws, e.g. fraud

Objectives
So you construct a system that works towards each of those goals by setting Objectives. This can only be done on a federal level and the system must cover both public and private entities.

For example, medical criteria for an admission to a hospital or skilled nursing facility reduces costs, makes the system more efficient, forces providers to become efficient and deliver care at the appropriate level.

Another, an electronic medical record and digital images allow easy access to providers, and its standardization and compatibility facilitates efficiency, may reduce costs, timeliness and appropriate care.

Bundled payments for admission diagnoses with limitations on length of stay gives elements that reimburse on a standard, thereby reducing costs and making the system efficient.

A single payer system also meets many of the goals above.

Regulation of drug prices and negotiating of prices controls costs. Generic prices are set at affordable (to patients) levels. Allow importation of drugs from other countries, but they must be of the same quality.

Fraud eats up 15% of health care dollars, so the DOJ needs to control to recover billions, which is also facilitated by the electronic medical record.

Costs differ between states (salaries, property for hospitals, etc). So flexibility must be built in. Allow states to be flexible in constructing a system that addresses their needs.

Those are starters and meant as examples. You should also define barriers to these objectives and devise a system that is fair to all. For instance, you need to adjust for risk and unexpected catastrophic costs to the system. I can think of more but will stop here.

That all makes sense. Thanks. So what would you prefer for you & your family...private insurance or something akin to NHS or what Canada has?

 

[Irish YJ]

Agreed. I just wonder if the US can truly afford to cover all. It’s just one symptom of what’s wrong w/ the U.S. bureacracy. I want to see stiffer regulations on what nationally elected officials get as far as salaries, healthcare, pension. Being an elected senator or rep is now simplay a gravy train. They preach about what all Americans should be given for “free” while enjoying a life w/ minimal financial stress.

I’d love to see them all brought to their knees. Make them where the same suits...like school uniforms. No more $5000 designer suits & Louis Vuiton bags. Sadly, they’d still find a way around any restrictions by using their political clout to curry favor w/ those in position to help them personally.

The US already spends far more than everyone else per capita on medical. It's not about affording, it's about making the changes to support the model. It's the same with education. The US spending on primary and secondary education is top 5 in the world. Many countries spend less and offer virtually free tuition to all through college. And have better systems. The US isn't even top 10.

And yes, politicians pay and benefits are plain silly. That's what happens when you're in charge of giving yourself raises lol... I'd love to see Trump cut everyone's pay and pension by 30%, and make them all use ACA. His approval rating would probably go through the roof lol...

 

[SonofOahu]

Lived in for 32 years of my life back home lol. Great experiences with it. Never paid for health insurance in my life. Our first child was born at home with the assistance of a Midwife Unit from the National Maternity Hospital and didn't cost us a dime. I probably am not the best person to ask as I have never been seriously ill or had any major injuries etc. but all my experiences with the system have been positive.

My brother is a Consultant Gastroenterologist, he came up through the Irish medical system and he might have a slightly different view, i knew they work long hours in understaffed departments with less pay like a US based counterpart but he enjoys the people he works with and the ideals of the system, basically they are working for the people of Ireland and not just for profit.

Specialists will often have a different outlook on universal healthcare than primary care practitioners. They have a very different worldview.

 

[dublinirish]

Specialists will often have a different outlook on universal healthcare than primary care practitioners. They have a very different worldview.

most definitely, but my brother came up through the system, worked A+E rooms etc he's seen alot and worked in UK and US hospitals for stints.

 

[Legacy]

That all makes sense. Thanks. So what would you prefer for you & your family...private insurance or something akin to NHS or what Canada has?

The Best Health Care System in the World: Which One Would You Pick? (NY Times)

To better understand one of the most heated U.S. policy debates, we created a tournament to judge which of these nations has the best health system: Canada, Britain, Singapore, Germany, Switzerland, France, Australia and the U.S.

“Medicare for all,” or “single-payer,” is becoming a rallying cry for Democrats.

This is often accompanied by calls to match the health care coverage of "the rest of the world." But this overlooks a crucial fact: The “rest of the world” is not all alike.

The commonality is universal coverage, but wealthy nations have taken varying approaches to it, some relying heavily on the government (as with single-payer); some relying more on private insurers; others in between.

Experts don’t agree on which is best; a lot depends on perspective. But we thought it would be fun to stage a small tournament.

We selected eight countries, representing a range of health care systems, and established a bracket by randomly assigning seeds.

An interesting way of comparing different country's health care plans with explanations by experts. You can see each's reasoning. Often it's a tradeoff in goals but all have universal healthcare systems to an extent and a federally-determined framework. Only Singapore's is essentially different because it is based on health savings accounts and the experts chose the current U.S. system, which differs from all the others of course. Wiki provides more in depth specifics on each country's systems.

Size of the country, population, expectations of citizens, shortages of providers in areas, quality of care delivered, affordability for individuals and families are also some factors.

Just comparing by cost alone (from a prior post):

Percent of GDP may be more helpful in comparison of costs.

America's health care system is the most expensive - 17.2 percent.
The French health system is relatively expensive at 11.8 percent of G.D.P.
Germany and Switzerland - Both systems cost their countries about 11 percent of G.D.P.
Canada and Britain are pretty similar in terms of spending — both spend just over 10 percent of G.D.P. on health care
Australia’s is at 9 percent.
Singapore’s system costs far less - 4.9 percent of G.D.P. (But, incomparison, the experts picked America's)

Note that the VA system also has universal coverage and a federal framework.

 

[Irishize]

The US already spends far more than everyone else per capita on medical. It's not about affording, it's about making the changes to support the model. It's the same with education. The US spending on primary and secondary education is top 5 in the world. Many countries spend less and offer virtually free tuition to all through college. And have better systems. The US isn't even top 10.

And yes, politicians pay and benefits are plain silly. That's what happens when you're in charge of giving yourself raises lol... I'd love to see Trump cut everyone's pay and pension by 30%, and make them all use ACA. His approval rating would probably go through the roof lol...

I agree but convincing me that building a bigger bureacracy w/in the gov’t and trusting them to spend the money efficiently will take more than showing how bad we rank worldwide via private insurance/uninsured/underinsured/Medicare/Medicaid. In other words, two wrongs don’t make a right.

I’m 100% for a change but handing it over to the bureaucrats b/c it works to perfection in some Nordic country w/ nowhere near the issues we have in America doesn’t sound like sound decision making. Especially when said bureaucrats don’t practice what they preach by insisting they can get the gold-plated coverage while we get the leftovers.

 

[Irishize]

The Best Health Care System in the World: Which One Would You Pick? (NY Times)



An interesting way of comparing different country's health care plans with explanations by experts. You can see each's reasoning. Often it's a tradeoff in goals but all have universal healthcare systems to an extent and a federally-determined framework. Only Singapore's is essentially different because it is based on health savings accounts and the experts chose the current U.S. system, which differs from all the others of course. Wiki provides more in depth specifics on each country's systems.

Size of the country, population, expectations of citizens, shortages of providers in areas, quality of care delivered, affordability for individuals and families are also some factors.

Just comparing by cost alone (from a prior post):

Percent of GDP may be more helpful in comparison of costs.

America's health care system is the most expensive - 17.2 percent.
The French health system is relatively expensive at 11.8 percent of G.D.P.
Germany and Switzerland - Both systems cost their countries about 11 percent of G.D.P.
Canada and Britain are pretty similar in terms of spending — both spend just over 10 percent of G.D.P. on health care
Australia’s is at 9 percent.
Singapore’s system costs far less - 4.9 percent of G.D.P. (But, incomparison, the experts picked America's)

Note that the VA system also has universal coverage and a federal framework.

I sincerely appreciate the effort you put in to posting this data. It really sheds light on the issue as it stands today. With that being said, what form of healtcare would Legacy prefer for himself & his family? I’d love your opinion.

 

[Irish YJ]

I agree but convincing me that building a bigger bureacracy w/in the gov’t and trusting them to spend the money efficiently will take more than showing how bad we rank worldwide via private insurance/uninsured/underinsured/Medicare/Medicaid. In other words, two wrongs don’t make a right.

I’m 100% for a change but handing it over to the bureaucrats b/c it works to perfection in some Nordic country w/ nowhere near the issues we have in America doesn’t sound like sound decision making. Especially when said bureaucrats don’t practice what they preach by insisting they can get the gold-plated coverage while we get the leftovers.

I think you and I are in perfect sync lol.

I know we need a change, I know it is possible to deliver better health care to all people for less money, but I don't trust our government to do it in an honest and efficient way.

I'm far left on HC and Education, but center or right on most other things. I'm not for big government at all. I mean,,,, we already spend more than anyone else, and just added the ACA which is a poorly conceived money pit on top of the existing overspend.

Unfortunately, the ACA has the right snake bitten on the topic. Mix in those wacky social democrats and all of sudden any mention of flip flopping HC will scare the shit out of most R and Center folk.

I also fear that if we were to try it, and did it successfully, the Social Dems might take it as "proof" that everything under the sun needs to be more socialistic....

 

[Legacy]

I sincerely appreciate the effort you put in to posting this data. It really sheds light on the issue as it stands today. With that being said, what form of healtcare would Legacy prefer for himself & his family? I’d love your opinion.

Sorry that I did not get back to you before this. But I limit my responses per day in the Political Threads.

Sure, but you first. Which country's or type of HC would you prefer? Would you make changes the VA system, which negotiates drug prices, takes bids on which health insurance company gets their contract, has expanded service so that veterans can see private physicians, takes everyone within a certain qualification, took bids on their softwares, sets prices and is administered by the federal government? Or a buy-in federal system for people whose income does not qualify like Medicaid for all?

One aspect of systems analysis is determining barriers. One of Obamacare's flaws is the private sector involvement with drug companies and the health insurance companies resisting involvement until they got what they wanted.

 

[SonofOahu]

I agree but convincing me that building a bigger bureacracy w/in the gov’t and trusting them to spend the money efficiently will take more than showing how bad we rank worldwide via private insurance/uninsured/underinsured/Medicare/Medicaid. In other words, two wrongs don’t make a right.

I’m 100% for a change but handing it over to the bureaucrats b/c it works to perfection in some Nordic country w/ nowhere near the issues we have in America doesn’t sound like sound decision making. Especially when said bureaucrats don’t practice what they preach by insisting they can get the gold-plated coverage while we get the leftovers.

That's why I think the solution isn't Medicare for all, it's closer to Medicare-Advantage for all. The government sets the standards, approves the vendors, and enforces the regulations, but the private-insurance companies are the channels by which the insurance is provided. This way, you're not displacing the insurance companies, not disrupting the entire industry, and not going zero-sum on results.

Medicare-Advantage for all would allow for market competition, while also assuring the ability of the government to look out for the best interest of the population.

 

[SonofOahu]

One of Obamacare's flaws is the private sector involvement with drug companies and the health insurance companies resisting involvement until they got what they wanted.

This

 

[Legacy]

Health Care Fraud

Health Care Fraud

As in any program - public or private - there is fraud. Every health care entity has a fraud division to combat this type of white-collar crime. Health insurance companies review their billing and rely on whistleblowers. For public programs like Medicare, the federal government, which has been helped by electronic medical records and software developed in the last five years to identify fraudulent billing, is actively pursuing and prosecuting offenders through local . The Strike-Force developed has been announcing arrests with significant fines in the millions and imprisonments.

The Justice Department including the FBI Strike-force has a division funded by Congress to identify these crimes.

Some stats and recent news for Medicare fraud:
Highlights
More than 600 charged in nation’s largest health care fraud investigation"]National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in Charges against 601 Defendants for Approximately $2 Billion in Losses

DOJ Strike Force Statistics
As of January 2018

Criminal Actions: 1,938
Indictments: 2,498
Money: $3,005,849,223

Some articles:
The Challenge of Health Care Fraud (National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association)

Also linked above:
More than 600 charged in nation’s largest health care fraud investigation
(Wash Post)
- Add $2+ billion to stats above.

Health Care Fraud (FBI) - Includes what you can do.

Health Care Fraud News (FBI)

$1 billion alleged Medicare fraud, money laundering scheme leads to Florida arrests (CNBC, July 2016)

DOJ announcement of $2 billion takedown by Jeff Sessions (story linked above)
Attorney General Sessions Delivers Remarks Announcing National Health Care Fraud and Opioid Takedown (Justice Dept)

This year we are charging 601 people, including 76 doctors, 23 pharmacists, 19 nurses, and other medical personnel with more than $2 billion in medical fraud.

Much of this fraud is related to our ongoing opioid crisis—which is the deadliest drug epidemic in American history. Some of our most trusted medical professionals look at their patients—vulnerable people suffering from addiction—and they see dollar signs.

Since January 2017, we have charged nearly 200 doctors and another 220 other medical personnel for opioid-related crimes. Sixteen of those doctors prescribed more than 20.3 million pills illegally.

While these billions are a significant amounts, the U.S. HC system's overall cost is $3.5 trillion and the above announcements generally refer to federal programs. You can do the math for the percentage lost through this white-collar crime. The electronic medical records with the Affordable Care Act and the criteria for admissions and discharges have helped the federal government monitor whether these are being followed and will deny payments to hospitals for billing. These are not included in the crime statistics but assist in providers keeping to federal standards, which are also followed by private HC insurers.

Also:
Fraud fears rise as feds expand access to association health plans
(Modern Healthcare)

DOJ Leverages Big Data Analytics to Combat Opioid Fraud, Abuse (Health Analytics)

 

[Irishize]

Sorry that I did not get back to you before this. But I limit my responses per day in the Political Threads.

Sure, but you first. Which country's or type of HC would you prefer? Would you make changes the VA system, which negotiates drug prices, takes bids on which health insurance company gets their contract, has expanded service so that veterans can see private physicians, takes everyone within a certain qualification, took bids on their softwares, sets prices and is administered by the federal government? Or a buy-in federal system for people whose income does not qualify like Medicaid for all?

One aspect of systems analysis is determining barriers. One of Obamacare's flaws is the private sector involvement with drug companies and the health insurance companies resisting involvement until they got what they wanted.

Sorry, finally got back to this thread. I’m still sorting this stuff out. Since you seem to have a handle on this (thanks for posting all the links & different options around the world!), I was curious what you & your family would deem ideal.

I do know this from experience. When my private health insurance denied or didn’t reimburse as much as they should have based on my coverage, I (or my wife) were always able to get it corrected in our favor but it took not giving up after multiple calls, etc. Insurance companies count on patients to give up & not have the patience or intestinal fortitude to keep attempting a favorable conclusion.

It requires spending time on the phone w/ customer service agents & managers but, in the end; it was always worth it. Call me cynical, but I don’t see a customer having as much success battling w/ the government.

 

[Legacy]

This contains much info previously shared, but worth a read.

As Catholic Hospitals Expand, So Do Limits on Some Procedures

 

[loomis41973]

Another WIN.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/08/24/five-states-win-839-million-obamacare-lawsuit/

 

[Legacy]

As a result of,
NC Blue Cross announces rate increase of 24.3 percent for ACA marketplace plans
(Charlotte Observer, October 17, 2016)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina has announced it will increase premiums for Affordable Care Act plans on the individual market by an average 24.3 percent for 2017. Some consumers will pay more and some will pay less.

That is higher than the company’s original rate request filed in May for an 18.8 percent increase. The rate was approved by the state Department of Insurance, and Blue Cross announced it in a blog post.

Blue Cross received an average 32.5 percent rate increase for 2016 – one of the highest in the country. Critics of the ACA have contended the health reform law has been failing partly because premium increases for the individual market plans have been rising beyond expectations.

Blue Cross reports surge in 2017 net income; executive compensation jumps as well
(Winston-Salem Journal Mar 1, 2018)

A boost in health exchange marketplace customers and a lower number of medical claims enabled Blue Cross Blue Shield of N.C. to boost fiscal 2017 net income nearly fourfold to $734 million.

The insurer said former chief executive Brad Wilson, who retired Oct. 1, received $1.18 million in salary, $2.56 million in bonuses and $507,293 in all other compensation for total compensation of $4.25 million.

Patrick Conway, who became chief executive on Oct. 1, received $253,846 in salary, a signing bonus of $750,000 and all other compensation of $50,804 for total compensation of $1.05 million.

Outside Conway, each of Blue Cross’ 10 listed executives received a bonus of at least $598,483 and total compensation of at least $1.1 million.

The next highest salary was paid to Gerald Petkau, its chief operating officer, at $592,859, along with a bonus of $1.45 million and total compensation of $2.22 million.

The increase in bonuses for the 10 named executives ranged from 23.3 percent to 91.9 percent. Six of those executives had experienced a bonus decrease from 2015 to 2016.

The Blues enjoys a tax-exempt status since it was founded in 1939 - a competitive advantage that it fights for in Congress each time that comes up. The California Franchise Tax Board revoked Blue Cross of California's tax-exempt status due to rate hikes, executive bonues and over $4 billion in the financial reserves.

Exec pay at Blue Cross parent rises despite Obamacare woes
(Crain's Chicago Business, October 06, 2016)

Salaries and bonuses were up across the board last year for top leaders at Health Care Service Corp., the Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurer in five states, including Illinois.

The top 10 executives cumulatively earned $56.7 million in 2015—the same year in which HCSC suffered substantial losses in the Affordable Care Act exchange markets.

That total was 57% higher than the $36.1 million that the same 10 executives earned in 2014.

The highest-paid executive was former CEO Patricia Hemingway Hall. She made nearly $16.6 million in 2015, a 42% increase from her $11.7 million pay package in 2014. Her compensation included a $1.5 million salary and nearly $15 million in bonuses. Hemingway Hall, who has made more than $68.3 million since 2011, retired last year after 23 years at HCSC.

Paula Steiner replaced Hemingway Hall as CEO. Steiner made almost $5.7 million as HCSC's president and chief strategy officer in 2015, 85% of which came from bonuses. Colleen Foley Reitan, the insurer's chief operating officer, was the second-highest-paid executive with a compensation package of $7.9 million.

Rates for Blue Cross customers in NC saw some rate decreases by 3.5% due to savings from federal tax cuts and a one-year suspension of the ACA's Health Insurer Tax , but rates could have been lowered by another 4 percent if Congress hadn't eliminated the ACA's requirement that everyone purchase health insurance or face a tax penalty. Congress' decision to halt federal cost-sharing reduction payments to insurers cost consumers another potential 14 percent rate reduction, according to BC officials.

So, should Congressional actions in eliminating the individual tax penalty and in halting federal cost-sharing reduction payments could have effectively lowered rates 18%, making up for some of the premium increases in the previous few years.

 

[Legacy]

Idaho’s rural hospitals say Medicaid expansion might keep them from closing (Idaho Statesman)
- 91,000 citizens affected

Medicaid expansion proposal getting thumbs up from Utah voters (Deseret News)
- 150,0000 Utah citizens affected

Nebraskans approve expanding Medicaid to cover more of the state's low-income residents (Omaha World Herald)
- 90,000 Nebraskans affected

 

[Legacy]

Medicare standards are generally followed by private insurers. For years, hospitals are not reimbursed for readmissions of patients within thirty days.

Medicare Cuts Payments To Nursing Homes Whose Patients Keep Ending Up In Hospital (Kaiser)

 

[Irish YJ]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez earns 4 Pinocchios over bungled defense budget interpretation <a href="https://t.co/4Jyksqnp5G">https://t.co/4Jyksqnp5G</a> <a href="https://t.co/jJn9h9rnax">pic.twitter.com/jJn9h9rnax</a></p>— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDRucker/status/1070033323207086083?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Legacy]

The enrollment period ends Dec 15th. Only 1 in 4 potential enrollees know that. Good article on possible federal changes.

KFF Health Tracking Poll – November 2018: Priorities for New Congress and the Future of the ACA and Medicaid Expansion
(Kaiser Family Foundation)

Key Facts about the Uninsured Population (KFF)

Excerpt:

Key Details:
- The number of uninsured, and the share of the nonelderly population that was uninsured, rose from 44.2 million (17.1%) to 46.5 million (17.8%) between 2008 and 2010 as the country faced an economic recession (Figure 1). As early provisions of the ACA went into effect in 2010, and as the economy improved, the number of uninsured people and uninsured rate began to drop. When the major ACA coverage provisions went into effect in 2014, the number of uninsured and uninsured rate dropped dramatically and continued to fall through 2016, when just below 27 million people (10% of the nonelderly population) lacked coverage

.
2 Moves By Trump This Past Week Could Reshape U.S. Health Insurance In Big Ways
(NPR, October 27, 2018)

 

[NorthDakota]

Federal judge rules ObamaCare unconstitutional.....

 

[Junkhead]

Federal judge rules ObamaCare unconstitutional.....

Is this a good thing for you? The affordable care act (Obamacare to some of you) is not the answer, but the healthcare system is this country is an absolute joke. At this point, I feel that anyone who sticks up for it in it's current state, is either a major stockholder in an insurance company, or hasn't yet had a family member bankrupted by a health issue.

 

[NorthDakota]

Is this a good thing for you? The affordable care act (Obamacare to some of you) is not the answer, but the healthcare system is this country is an absolute joke. At this point, I feel that anyone who sticks up for it in it's current state, is either a major stockholder in an insurance company, or hasn't yet had a family member bankrupted by a health issue.

Yes. I am not a believer in state healthcare. I don't believe healthcare is something we are entitled to. Others disagree, and they are entitled to their opinion.

 

[Junkhead]

Yes. I am not a believer in state healthcare. I don't believe healthcare is something we are entitled to. Others disagree, and they are entitled to their opinion.

Fair enough. I don't agree, just attempting to understand.