It’s garbage insurance
I used to sell health insurance. ACA took that away from me. I will never vote for the party that did that to me
I was able to protect my clients from the garbage. After ACA, they were on their own
2 Likes
Yeah, kicking kids off at 18 and denying those
with pre-existing conditions was SO much better.
4 Likes
Texas had a risk pool that was run by Blue Cross that was solid
Do you know how much cheaper it was to buy a stand alone policy on an 18 year old? Way cheaper than when added on a group plan unless you had 4+ kids.
I had insurance on the lady who did my wife’s nail. Good plan with Blue Cross. When ACA came in, Blue Cross said she couldn’t keep her plan, She tried to get as close to what she had. A few months later she is diagnosed with breast cancer. Her old plan (which was cheaper) included MD Anderson. New plan did not and had her going all over town.
Keep telling me how ACA was an improvement
1 Like
So you were happy with the industry that canceled my mother’s health insurance after she got cancer.
What a wonderful person you are.
Kind of fits with the theme of your other posts.
PS all the lady had to do was go on healthcare.gov and find a plan that took MD Anderson. Its still not hard. You’re once again gaslighting.
4 Likes
I think the affordable health care act is good. It gives people that are part time or have no insurance thru work a chance. My company rates haven’t really gone up because of it.
Also the plan covers pre- existing issues which is really good.
Even if my rates went up I’m ok for the greater good it does.
We’re a capitalist country but the elements of soc sec, Medicare and the affordable care act cushion the harshness of capitalism and keep rebellion at bay.
If you study history, before soc sec , they had tons of old people camping out at the capital starving people then later the gov said we need to do something about it.
A person trying to buy insurance on their own if underemployed or part time / pre existing issues would have such high premiums it wouldn’t be doable .
It gives them a chance and I know several people below 65 that are on it and it’s a life saver.
I’m ok paying more for them.
We have to figure out our house etc under capitalism so we’re not going to go full blown socialism as republicans want you to believe.
These programs keep rebellion at bay.
If you want to hate on anything, hate the insurance companies and their lobbyists.
2 Likes
Looks like you have now been told.
I get your personal pet peeve as a guy that sold insurance.
You, as a middleman, made money from the old way. And Im sure you
see it as you were providing a valuable service to your customers.
Sometimes the problems for the whole out weigh the benefits to the salesman,
if you can see the bigger picture.
Not saying ACA is perfect; but it was a step in the right direction for the problems
described above. I’m certainly open to a better solution that’s not tied to your employer, doesn’t kick kids out, and doesn’t terminate or exclude folks with pre-existing conditions.
4 Likes
How do you explain my insurance went up over 120% since the ACA started?
How do you explain my company does not offer a PPO now?
How do explain the same ones that pushed ACA down our wallets knew that it had “expiring dates” and never told anyone?
How do you explain that these expiring dates would double quadruple these rates and it was not explained?
How do you explain when someone said "“We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”
Whose fault is it that working people can’t afford for their insurance while non working people are helped?
These are facts.
No. You could have done 2 things under the old system and fixed it.
-
require mandatory health insurance
-
fed or state risk pools.
It would have been cheaper, more comprehensive and equitable.
1 Like
I think the insurance companies are to blame.
If you work for a big enough company, you generally have insurance and they have to cover pre existing issues while employed.
Issue is if your below 65 , underemployed, part time or work for a smaller company with no insurance then the ACA is the only solution for them.
What they should do is disengage healthcare from the employer model and let individuals buy on their own but force insurance to cover pre existing issues without the ability to drop them at an affordable price. Give the subsidy to the people. Right now companies get the subsidy tax write off from the gov to a certain extent which allows them to cover employees. I say move all that to the people with safe guards of no dropping , cover pre existing and affordable at the same old company rates. Right now your only ok if working till 65 but if can’t or fired then the ACA is the only option bc a 59 yr old guy buying free market insurance would pay $1000s or more per month on his own if not for the ACA. It was created to solve that problem of somehow not having company ins . Before the ACA you had to work at a good job till 65 or your screwed. So the plan filled that gap in case people need it before the major 65 and Medicare age. It helps people retire early and work part time vs having to go to 65.
Take it away from the employer model.
Insurance didn’t want to do that so they are the problem. Insurance companies are the problem, not the ACA or the people.
Insurance companies are on the stock exchange beholden to shareholders so they need to keep profits up at the expense of the people.
2 Likes
The reasons insurnace through companies is cheaper is because they negotiate a price based on a group plan which includes pre existing conditions.
Making everyone negotiate one on one with plans will reduce choice, have it cost more, and find people with pre-existing conditions excluded (the insurance company will define what is pre-existing.)
I think there should be a minimum universal healthcare plan and if people want better choices or access then they can buy supplemental plans.
We are the only country in the world with our system and trust me countries are in no hurry to copy our system.
3 Likes
They could group individuals into larger groups such as state or region much like the company model . They’re ways to make that work even as individuals.
Again insurance is against any changes bc they want high profits. They are in business to deny coverage in many cases.
Insurance in America is the only place it’s very messed up bc of our model. It can be fixed but lobbyists and Insurance companies resist change.
The reason it’s in the news is bc it’s messed up and needs to be fixed or fund the ACA . It wouldn’t be in the news etc if it was all ok.
Insurance by nature makes prices higher.
Example, did we have this problem before insurance? No , In the 40s, 50s and 60s , everything was fine. Insurance came along in the late 70s , jacked up costs bc companies etc write off some and want huge profits. Doctors wanted insurance bc they then could get rich. Before all this doctors could only rely on what a person could pay so the rates stayed low.
Because everyone in the high-risk pool has significant health needs, the average cost of the pool is extremely high. Consequently, the premiums for people in this pool are much higher, often up to twice the standard rate, and sometimes unaffordable.
In the 40s and 50s employers covered healthcare cost for employees as a way to retain employees. They also got pensions when they retired.
The problem we have is for self employed, poor low income/part-time workers and some elderly.
It is why I like the idea of universal coverage for everyone with suplemental plans for enhanced coverage. A system similar to what Singapore has
2 Likes
Obama originally wanted a universal plan but insurance companies and lobbyists told him it was a no go so they killed it then he had to go with the ACA model keeping insurance companies involved .
McCain tried to do direct payments to people to help subsidize it but that got stopped .
Insurance is a hard thing to fix. If it were easy, it would have been already.
The ACA is pretty popular despite what some here think about it. It could be better but neither side has improved it in the 15 years since the law passed. There have been ample opportunities to do so too.
4 Likes
Okay. Show us the detailed plan with the estimated premiums and the role of
the insurance companies in this plan. Show the details.
Insurance companies are making profits out the health needs of people.
Medical insurance especially.
Of course property insurance is becoming more of a problem too, with
companies raising rates or just refusing to serve certain areas and cancelling
your policy.
Edit- We’ve really hijacked this thread on tariffs 
It’s not hard to fix, but yes it’s highly regulated.
That being said, it’s pretty obvious.
Once side wants the “free market” to solve all problems, and the other side does not.
The “free market” side wants to ignore externalities, and the other side wants to cut into deep pockets.
There’s no middleground because both sides want the other to lose at the expense of average Americans.
1 Like
So? What is insurance? Whatever financial risk you do not feel confident in covering yourself, you pay someone to take it off your hands.
Nobody sells insurance if there isn’t the potential for profit
1 Like