Barrack Obama
- Thread starter WVUALLEN
- Start date
Conclusions. The ACA has reduced racial/ethnic disparities in coverage, although substantial disparities remain. Further increases in coverage will require Medicaid expansion by more states and improved program take-up in states that have already done so.
Large disparities in health insurance coverage related to race and ethnicity are a long-standing feature of the US health care system and a cause for concern among policymakers and health care professionals. Several studies have identified these differences in insurance coverage as an important determinant of disparities in access to care.1–5 In addition, a growing literature shows that by reducing exposure to large medical expenses, health insurance leads to better financial outcomes, such as improved credit scores and a reduced risk of bankruptcy.6–9 Thus, policies that reduce disparities in health insurance coverage are likely to have a broader effect on economic inequality.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has made new health insurance options available to uninsured individuals in low- and middle-income households, a group in which Blacks and Hispanics are overrepresented. A recent study by McMorrow et al.10 that used data from the National Health Interview Survey found that although the uninsured rate declined overall between 2013 and 2014, it decreased by a larger amount among Black and Hispanic adults than among White adults (8 percentage points vs 4 percentage points). The uninsured rate for Black and Hispanic adults decreased significantly in states that embraced the ACA’s Medicaid expansion and also in those that did not. For White adults, the percentage uninsured declined in both sets of states, although the estimated change was not statistically significant in nonexpansion states.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4940635/
We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars already; massively increased the size of the federal budget; subsidized insurance plans to get Americans to sign up.
If this is Obama’s grand success, imagine how bad the failures were.
One of the central claims made by proponents was that insurance premiums would go down for buyers.
https://humanevents.com/2013/03/27/...-admits-obamacare-is-raising-insurance-costs/
Don’t worry, folks, ObamaCare is blowing premiums through the roof, but there will be subsidies available for lower-income Americans! That means the rest of us will get screwed twice – once when we pay our higher insurance premiums, then again when we pay for all those lovely subsidies.
It’s cute when these people pretend to care about the deficit in order to beat tax increases out of us, isn’t it?
The rate of uninsured may continue to rise as long as Obamacare is in effect. Even its supporters have acknowledged its failures, which is why many of them have given up on Obamacare and are calling for more government through Medicare for all.
https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured
ObamaCare has failed to solve many of the health care problems it was supposed to address. Even worse, it has compounded many of the issues it was meant to fix — the law of unintended consequences in action.
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/486134-obamacare-10-years-of-distress-and-disappointment
The Affordable Care Act marks its 10th anniversary this year. And ten years later, the law has failed to live up to its name.
The last decade has seen insurance premiums soar and coverage options dwindle for millions of people. The share of Americans without insurance is on the rise, while the nation's doctor shortage is growing more acute by the day.
Between 2013, the year before the exchanges opened, and 2017, average individual premiums on the HealthCare.gov marketplace more than doubled. Since 2014, average exchange-plan premiums have risen by 70%.
https://www.tennessean.com/story/op...re-has-failed-us-over-past-decade/2988022001/
Obamacare failed because it flunked Economics 101 and Human Nature 101. It straitjacketed insurers into providing overly expensive, soup-to-nuts policies. It wasn't flexible enough so that people could buy as much coverage as they wanted and could afford — not what the government dictated. Many healthy people primarily want catastrophic coverage. Obamacare couldn't lure them in, couldn't persuade them to buy on the chance they'd get sick.
Obamacare failed because the penalties for going uncovered are too low when stacked against its skyrocketing premium costs. Next year, the penalty for staying uninsured is $695 per adult, or perhaps 2.5 percent of a family's taxable household income. That's far less than many Americans would pay for coverage. Financial incentive: Skip Obamacare.
Obamacare failed because insurance is based on risk pools — that is, the lucky subsidize the unlucky. The unlucky who have big health problems (and big medical bills) reap much greater benefits than those who remain healthy and out of the doctors' office. But Obamacare's rules hamstring insurers. They can't exclude people for pre-existing conditions, and can't charge older customers more than three times as much as the young. Those are good goals, but they skew the market in ways Obamacare didn't figure out how to offset. Result: Young and healthy consumers pay far more in premiums than their claims (probably) would justify in order to subsidize the unexpectedly large influx of older, sicker customers who require expensive care. Too many unlucky people, too few lucky people: That will collapse any insurance scheme.
Obamacare failed because it allowed Americans to sign up after they got sick and needed help paying all those medical bills. Insurance should be structured so that, although you don't know if you'll need it, you pay for it anyway, just in case; your alternative is financial doom. But if you can game the system and, for example, buy auto coverage after you crash into your garage, then you have no incentive to buy insurance beforehand.
Obamacare failed because it hasn't tamed U.S. medical costs. Health care is about supply and demand: People who get coverage use it, especially if the law mandates free preventive care. Iron law of economics: Nothing is free; someone pays. To pretend otherwise was folly. Those forces combined to spike the costs of care, and thus insurance costs.
Obamacare failed because too many carriers simply can't cover expenses, let alone turn a profit, in this rigidly controlled system. Take Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois, the state's dominant Obamacare insurer. Last year, for every dollar the carrier collected, it spent $1.32 buying care and providing services for customers, according to BCBS President Maurice Smith. No wonder BCBS is proposing rate increases from 23 percent to 45 percent for its individual plans.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opin...nsurance-medicine-0911-jm-20160909-story.html
It was a bold policy that ATTEMPTED to address the income gap. You said he made no attempt, I said he did. Whether the ACA worked or not, is another discussion.
"Obamacare failed because it allowed Americans to sign up after they got sick and needed help paying all those medical bills. Insurance should be structured so that, although you don't know if you'll need it, you pay for it anyway, just in case; your alternative is financial doom. But if you can game the system and, for example, buy auto coverage after you crash into your garage, then you have no incentive to buy insurance beforehand."
But the problem is that you have to have one of the following two:
1. Force people to buy insurance, which means the healthy people that don't need a lot of health care are subsidizing the sick people that do need a lot of health care. But if you do this, the people being forced to buy insurance will scream bloody murder.
2. Don't force people to buy insurance, in which case healthy people won't buy it and the sick people will buy it but be charged a fortune because it's not subsidized by healthy people.
But the problem is that you have to have one of the following two:
1. Force people to buy insurance, which means the healthy people that don't need a lot of health care are subsidizing the sick people that do need a lot of health care. But if you do this, the people being forced to buy insurance will scream bloody murder.
2. Don't force people to buy insurance, in which case healthy people won't buy it and the sick people will buy it but be charged a fortune because it's not subsidized by healthy people.
You have lost what little credibility you had with your posts in this thread, OBooma. So, Obama signed Obamacare because he wanted to close the racial wealth gap? Link CNN or whatever other left-wing source that you have for this assertion. Your posting this bullsh!t would be like my posting that Trump isn't brash, arrogant or confrontational. Your hero Obama's policies didn't narrow the wage gap, and the numbers prove it. Look them up.
I didn’t even vote for him in ‘12, so I think you’re way off. And I’ll say AGAIN it working is another discussion. The ACA was Obama’s big try, it was bold, it was designed to help close the income gap - the reasons why it could’ve POTENTIALLY closed the gap are well described in the article I linked.
The best laid plans of mice and men...
Unfortunately, you don’t get points for good intentions.
Obamacare was promulgated to provide medical insurance coverage to millions of uninsured Americans. It included those previously not eligible for coverage, especially persons with pre-existing conditions. It also mandated that insurance companies include ten (10) essential benefits.The ACA’s primary goal was to mitigate the rising cost of health care. It allowed people to afford reasonable preventive care rather than wait for expensive emergency services to befall them. It also sought to help low-income earners by expanding Medicaid eligibility.Although Congress made major changes to Obamacare, the ACA still remains strongly in place. Trump has made repeated attempts to repeal it, though he has not yet presented any viable health care replacement nor has the Republican party. Recent polling regarding the ACA indicates that 49% of Americans remain strongly in favor of the Act, 47% oppose it.
Thanks for the history lesson that we’re all well aware of, new guy. The individual mandate was repealed. My heartburn with it is over. It’ll succeed or it won’t. If it doesn’t, and let’s be honest, unless the left infuses massive amounts of change and money into it, it’s going to fail, it’ll be the death rattle for liberal policies as it was the most signature piece of legislation since LBJs ********. We have 60 years of failure tied to those and you all just keep on trying to dump money.
10 more years boys, 10 more years. I’m heading out of the US, burning my passport when I land either in the Islands or central/South America and you all can have this fvcking lunatic asylum. You need me, I’ll be the gringo in flip flops with a nice tan telling the latest Marlin or Sailfish story coming off my boat and heading to my restaurant.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda, but I understand the distinction between pie-in-the-sky hope and actually achieving a desired result. You and I apparently agree that Obamacare has been a failure. What we disagree about is the motivation for passing Obamacare. The Democrats argued that access to healthcare was a fundamental human right, and that providing such access was essential because people without insurance wouldn't receive medical care. Of course, this was a lie, with respect to emergency care, as most hospitals treat people regardless of whether they have insurance. In any event, the motivation for Obamacare was allegedly health care access for all. Saying that it was motivated by narrowing the "racial wealth gap" is incorrect. Raising the minimum wage would be a different story.
I'm going out on a limb and say you have insurance. Do you enjoy paying double the cost for your premium insurance? Are you happy to to pay a 60/40 instead of 80/20?
“It’s more likely someone is going to get caught cheating on this than on their small business taxes.” — —Timothy Jost, professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS:
95% of the gains to the top 1%. That is so striking.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA:
It- it is. And the folks- at- in the middle and at the bottom haven't seen- wage or- income growth, not just over the last three, four years, but over the last 15 years. And so everything that I've done has been designed to, number one, stabilize the economy, get it growing again, start producing jobs again, number two, trying to push against these trends that had been happening for decades now.
That's why we made sure that we had a tax system that was a little bit fairer by asking people to- pay more at the top. That's what the Affordable Care Act- health care reform is about, is making sure that folks who- have been left out in the cold when it comes to health care are able to get health care.
So now you're saying you're trying to change the thread like a troll does. Stay on topic Mustafa.
I concede your point, OBooma. Obama was far dumber than I realized, as he apparently had the illusion that Obamacare was a panacea for wage disparity, even as his cronies on the Left used much different propaganda to sell this pig in a poke.
You changed the topic when accurately disputed your OP. Nothing about the ACA specifically in the above post is there? I brought up the ACA as the BOLD POLICY HE PURSUED TO CLOSE THE RACIAL INCOME GAP (a gap, btw, that Obama always stayed was based on demographics but not race).
I don't know the details of the ACA. I thought there was part of it that forced people that opted out to pay a fee. But regardless, I don't think the root problem is that healthy people that don't have insurance are forced to buy it, rather it's that if you try to force healthy people that don't have insurance to buy it, they'll scream bloody murder because you're forcing them to buy something they don't want to buy. They, understandably, don't want to spend money on something on which they get no return.
But the problem is if they do eventually become sick it bankrupts them and/or society has to pay for their medical care, which means they de facto do have health insurance but they aren't paying for it.
And aside from that, another problem is that health care costs a lot.
Can't speak for everyone but would prefer to choose my own than to have someone say you have to take this or else.
Anyone who is working pays for medicare even the person you say does not want the insurance. It's taken out in the form of Social Security.
I would say most people needs for health insurance is for prescription drugs. Another failure of forced insurance is they can tell you what medication you can take and not what medication the doctor prescribed or is working for you.
Pharmaceutical companies are a whole different ballgame that need to be corrected. That should be for another thread.
Yeah, I could post your OP again again, if it helps with the struggle you’re having reading the words in the thread.
Ok. I never said it was successful or smart - I said it was his BOLD POLICY ATTEMPT to address the income gap. So....keep jackin each other off over O’s failures, I realize it’s the best white conservative porn there is, that jobs report probably helps too.
Do you understand what "distinction without a difference" means, Boom? Obamacare has been a failure, regardless of anybody's true motivation for its enactment.
So says the orange man hater who pounds his peter every time Trump farts in public.
[laughing]
You're missing my point. You've made yours...over and over again...but it makes no difference. It has been a failed policy, and the wage gap increased under Obama/Biden. Their administration was a one-trick pony, but the horse died. You want to give them a participation ribbon for "trying," so good for you. They shouldn't have hitched their wagon to Obamacare as a wage-gap solution, and the numbers prove it, sorry.
Then you should’ve said that in the thread title (Oh that’s right, it wasn’t you- it was your teammate) - I wouldn’t have posted in it. And I do think big O should get credit for trying something bold, status quo ain’t changing without somethin bold, imo.
But like I’ve said many FVCKING times - I didn’t even vote for him in ‘12 because of my disappointment. And as much as I love “pounding my peter” to the constant farts Orangeman rips daily, I’m pretty sure I’m not voting for O’s VP either. But you keep things simple upstairs, I’d hate to give you headache.
Everyone that has a formal job pays for Medicare but Medicare is for people over age 65. So people with formal jobs pay for the insurance of other people but not necessarily themselves. They and/or their employer have to pay separate for the workers health insurance or else they don't pay and the worker has no health insurance, which most people find fine until they get sick and get handed medical bills they can't pay or they can pay but are so large they don't want to pay.