Healthcare & Health Insurance Catch-All | GOP seeking a plan

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 318
  • Views: 13K
  • Politics 
lawtig02 said:
Seems to me that’s the point. This thing is a gambit by the pharmaceutical donors to get MAGA to buy more expensive brands rather than less expensive generics.
Click to expand...
Yep. They're counting on the endless ignorance and gullibility of his base to just say "Wow! Look at this great new website our glorious president has created just for us - Obama and Biden never did anything like this!" and they'll go broke buying ridiculously expensive name-brand drugs that they could get generic at a fraction of what they're paying on TrumpRx.
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

I'm sure that I will not agree with much from his plan, but I do agree that people need to actually understand the prices and the game, so they will push for actual reform.

That's a reason that I felt the ACA subsidies hid the real cost of medical care and didn't help solve the issue.
 
nycfan said:
IMG_4572.jpeg



“…Florida remains the only state in the country the FDA has authorized to import prescription drugs. But the state’s effort has stalled in part because it failed to win over the Canadian drug industry, which has consistently warned the Canadian government that the U.S. program jeopardized the country’s drug supply.

Florida’s Canadian drug program was expected to save the state close to $180 million by taking advantage of the country’s pricing structure for prescription drugs. And the governor held up the program as a model for other states to follow.

The Food and Drug Administration granted Florida final authorization to import Canadian prescription drugs more than two years ago with a promise from the state that it would begin importing drugs in a matter of months. But AHCA subsequently failed to launch its program, amid years of fierce headwinds brought by the Canadian market.

… DeSantis spokesperson Molly Best said in an email that the state’s vendor is still in negotiations with Canadian manufacturers and distribution partners. A meeting scheduled by the FDA for November was canceled due to the federal government shutdown last year, and it was rescheduled for March. Until then, the FDA has continued the state’s authorization to operate the program until May.…”
Click to expand...

If we hate Canada's socialist medical plan so much, why do we try to use it to lower our prescription prices?

Why not actually follow their model and make it work here? Instead of trying to take advantage of the neighbor that drump has alienated?
 
I'm watching the Pitt, a really good ER show.

They like to hit on some big issues in this country.

They had a patient who's working multiple jobs and has no health insurance. He couldn't afford his medications and already had tremendous medical debt, so he choose to leave without completing his treatment. Later he returns in worse shape.

A great example of our failed medical system.

I'd imagine we could put a dent in funding of universal Healthcare with the cost of the fucking bombs we're dropping on Iran.

Fuck the damn politicians who have lied and convinced so many in need that they are better off with no health insurance than the are with Socialism.
 
nycfan said:
IMG_6937.jpeg

🎁. Obamacare Enrollment Drops Sharply as Costs Rise
Click to expand...
“… Initial sign-ups had already fallen by about 1.2 million people. But insurance companies, state officials and industry analysts are reporting that many more have lost Obamacare coverage now that people are facing long-term higher costs. The federal government has yet to report current enrollment data.

Many insurers and analysts are estimating overall declines of about 20 percent, dropping to around 19 million from the 24 million who were covered under the A.C.A. last year. Other indications suggest there could be even larger potential losses by the end of the year, a deep retrenchment for Obamacare coverage and a reversal of significant gains in the last several years.…”
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

Were indefinite subsidies always the plan? This isn't bait. I really don't remember.

I do remember that the idea was to bend the cost curve, which is a big lift considering the aging of the population, but the thought was more efficiencies, fights for payments and less people free riding in the emergency room would help to lower overall medical costs. I don't know if that was the trigger to lower subsidies or even if lower subsidies were going to be a thing.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Were indefinite subsidies always the plan? This isn't bait. I really don't remember.

I do remember that the idea was to bend the cost curve, which is a big lift considering the aging of the population, but the thought was more efficiencies, fights for payments and less people free riding in the emergency room would help to lower overall medical costs. I don't know if that was the trigger to lower subsidies or even if lower subsidies were going to be a thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, they were always the plan. It has been explained to you before. Maybe if you spent time reading and not calling me a Professor of Washing Machine Repair or brainlessly contradicting everything, you'd understand.

Subsidies are the third leg to the famous "three legged stool" of insurance markets. The goal is comprehensive coverage/guaranteed issue/no pre-existing condition exclusion. That can only be achieved if you can get everyone in the market -- hence the mandate and the subsidies.

If you get rid of either, the insurance market can enter a death spiral. The markets were robust enough, I guess, to survive the loss of the mandate, but that only worked because of the expanded subsidies.

Without subsidies, adverse selection will bomb out every attempt at guaranteed issue/no preexisting condition exclusion health insurance system. This is first week of a health economics course. I covered in my courses in about 20 minutes (adverse selection is a broader concept with applications in finance and corporate law among other areas)
 
"
Instability in the ACA market presents a challenge for insurers, which are starting to propose rates for 2027 ACA plans in filings with state regulators. Younger, healthier people are more likely to end their coverage when monthly bills go up, leaving a greater proportion of sicker policyholders who have bigger healthcare costs. Insurers will typically raise their rates to cover higher average projected spending.

As the ACA population continues to decline, insurers may struggle to predict where next year’s rates should land—and cautiously request big premium increases, a dynamic that could push even more people out of the market in the future. ACA premiums already rose sharply in many states this year."

From the WSJ article.

This dynamic motivated the structure of the ACA. Democrats talked about it endlessly. GOPers, as usual, decided instead to deny reality. Now the ACA is potentially crumbling. I suspect the market stabilizes at a lower coverage/higher price equilibrium but what a shame that we can't give health care to people because the Pentagon needs trillions of dollars for killing people pointlessly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top