• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama calls for adding public option to ObamaCare

ludin said:
You didn't read I said they tried to tank. It is there in black and white so why are you being dishonest in what I said?

Those companies lost 10's of millions on those plans why to you think they are pulling out?
Click to expand...

All the more reason for a public option. Thats the problem, its only profitable for health insurance companies to cover healthy people. That is why we have Medicare for old people because they would be otherwise uninsurable in the private sector. Its why so many cancer patients end up on Medicaid before they die.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The costs in our healthcare are not in sniffles and boos, they are in trama, injury, and sickness. You could have everyone paying for their own checkups and you would not do anything to the costs of healthcare overall. For example, it is nothing for 1 chemo treatment just one visit for chemo to run 45k. It is nothing for someone to rack up well over 100k in bills with one heart attack. What pressure are you going to put on those costs simply by going to catastrophic plans with everyone having an HSA?
Click to expand...

Sure it would.
That is why your car insurance is so low. You assume all maintenance.
Same goes for you. You assume all Maintenance.
The only thing insurance covers is catastrophic incidents.

Easy shopping around for the best treatment will automatically lower costs.
Doctors and hospitals will discount 70-90% if you can pay in cash.

This has pretty much been proven fact.

Your cancer is what the insurance plan covers.
 
ludin said:
You didn't read I said they tried to tank. It is there in black and white so why are you being dishonest in what I said?

Those companies lost 10's of millions on those plans why to you think they are pulling out?
Click to expand...
They made a bad choice?
 
Casper said:
Yes, just like a Politician.

I know all about the VA, never said I supported anything other than maybe Affordable Healthcare, do not ASSUME.
Click to expand...

My only assumption is that Obama's and his ilk going to double down on 'his legacy' and yet try to force single payer, what they always wanted fro the onset, down an unwilling nation's throat - exactly the most wrong and worst possible way of doing it.

Please pardon me, I wasn't assuming anything about your position on this, but was more following on, on your theme of wanting single payer from the onset.
 
ludin said:
Asking for personal information is against the rules of the forum.
All I will say is that they are good and I don't have to worry.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you and your family are in good hands Ludin, Just as I was in good hands with the VA before bush and the war criminals started the wars and overwhelmed the VA.

But if this congress would get their hands outta their collective ass’s the VA COULD be what it was before the war criminals wars.:thumbs:
 
Chomsky said:
Actually - he called for it, and Joe Lieberman killed it!

We were *one* freakin' vote away! :(
Click to expand...

Nooo, the way I remember it was the option was out there but Obama didn't fight for it. He capitulated.
 
eohrnberger said:
My only assumption is that Obama's and his ilk going to double down on 'his legacy' and yet try to force single payer, what they always wanted fro the onset, down an unwilling nation's throat - exactly the most wrong and worst possible way of doing it.
Click to expand...

No. This is what Obama wrote:

Now, based on experience with the ACA, I think Congress should revisit a public plan to compete alongside private insurers in areas of the country where competition is limited. Adding a public plan in such areas would strengthen the Marketplace approach, giving consumers more affordable options while also creating savings for the federal government.
Click to expand...

This is the exact opposite of single-payer. He's calling for additional competitors in regions where there are currently are few (say one).
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
My only assumption is that Obama's and his ilk going to double down on 'his legacy' and yet try to force single payer, what they always wanted fro the onset, down an unwilling nation's throat - exactly the most wrong and worst possible way of doing it.

Please pardon me, I wasn't assuming anything about your position on this, but was more following on, on your theme of wanting single payer from the onset.
Click to expand...

He does not have the time or support to pull it off.

I was referring to what "they" wanted.
 
jet57 said:
Nooo, the way I remember it was the option was out there but Obama didn't fight for it. He capitulated.
Click to expand...
I remember a fight 'till the end, though perhaps it was Pelosi carrying the torch.

Actually, Obama did seem to stumble on the totality of the healthcare bill, while it was the Speaker that strongly revived it and got it over the finish-line!
 
ludin said:
Sure it would.
That is why your car insurance is so low. You assume all maintenance.
Same goes for you. You assume all Maintenance.
The only thing insurance covers is catastrophic incidents.

Easy shopping around for the best treatment will automatically lower costs.
Doctors and hospitals will discount 70-90% if you can pay in cash.

This has pretty much been proven fact.

Your cancer is what the insurance plan covers.
Click to expand...

If your car gets too expensive to repair, they just total it. Do you want healthcare to work the same way? You want your insurer to say "Well thats a 1950 model caucasian male, we are only going to pay up to 30k in healthcare costs before we will just switch them over to hospice care." Moreover, you are not a car. A car is only typically repaired to the market value of the vehicle. If health insurance worked like car insurance, then a health insurer would pay far more for the care of a corporate lawyer than they would for a carpenter, and they would pay next to nothing for kid's care or the healthcare of seniors as they would have little market value (What is a kid worth in the workplace or a retired senior?). That is how car insurance works so if you want to apply that to health insurance, you are right, that system would certainly reduce costs - by letting most sick people just die as soon as they get very expensive to cover.

As to negotiating with cash money. Its nothing for cancer care to costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. Lets say no negotiate it down to 100k. You think you can write that check? Mind you, your sick with cancer so its pretty likely your too sick to work right now and are digging into your savings to live on while your sick.
 
Greenbeard said:
No. This is what Obama wrote:



This is the exact opposite of single-payer. He's calling for additional competitors in regions where there are currently are few (say one).
Click to expand...
Well, yes and no.

The public option becomes the government provided choice.

It does not profit, was to include the 3M federal civil employees, and was to be made available everywhere.

Due to the above, and what was assumed to be a propensity for many to select the government option over private for profit options, it was thought it would become the largest insurer as well as the cheapest (i.e. private profit companies would get pushed-out by the cheaper fed subsidized & fed run insurer), so the public option would eventually morph into the de facto insurer - essentially single-payer.

That's why the private insurers lobbied to effectively shut it down.

But yes, it's often thought a public option will eventually become single-payer over time.
 
Greenbeard said:
No. This is what Obama wrote:



This is the exact opposite of single-payer. He's calling for additional competitors in regions where there are currently are few (say one).
Click to expand...

Calling for additional competitors in a government rigged marketplace (ObamaCare sets the rules for the plans offered) one from which the private sector insurance providers are turning away from. The government is only going to be the new competitor to enter these 'marketplaces', this will represent yet another step to total government control of all facets of healthcare in the nation. Something the government has yet to prove it's capable of doing, let alone doing well.
 
Chomsky said:
Due to the above, and what was assumed to be a propensity for many to select the government option over private for profit options, it was thought it would become the largest insurer as well as the cheapest (i.e. private profit companies would get pushed-out by the cheaper fed subsidized & fed run insurer), so the public option would eventually morph into the de facto insurer - essentially single-payer.
Click to expand...

This theory doesn't even work in actual Medicare. The private, (largely) for-profit wing of the program has been steadily gaining market share relative to the traditional FFS government option, despite assurances that the ACA would somehow run the former out of business since it leveled the playing field between the two. Instead both exist side-by-side and compete for new Medicare beneficiaries.
`
 
eohrnberger said:
Calling for additional competitors in a government rigged marketplace (ObamaCare sets the rules for the plans offered) one from which the private sector insurance providers are turning away from. The government is only going to be the new competitor to enter these 'marketplaces', this will represent yet another step to total government control of all facets of healthcare in the nation. Something the government has yet to prove it's capable of doing, let alone doing well.
Click to expand...

Every other industrialized nation does it. Pretending that the US is the only one that can't is lunacy.
 
eohrnberger said:
Calling for additional competitors in a government rigged marketplace (ObamaCare sets the rules for the plans offered) one from which the private sector insurance providers are turning away from. The government is only going to be the new competitor to enter these 'marketplaces', this will represent yet another step to total government control of all facets of healthcare in the nation.
Click to expand...

The lines you're trying to draw here mean very little. The "private sector insurance providers" you're talking about make a significant chunk of their revenue from "government" (single-payer?) insurance: Medicare and Medicaid. Medicaid is where the real money from the ACA coverage expansions is being made by private insurers--by some of the very same actors that whine about losing money on the much smaller market segment they insure through commercial plans in the exchanges.

scyu5x.png
 
Greenbeard said:
This theory doesn't even work in actual Medicare. The private, (largely) for-profit wing of the program has been steadily gaining market share relative to the traditional FFS government option, despite assurances that the ACA would somehow run the former out of business since it leveled the playing field between the two. Instead both exist side-by-side and compete for new Medicare beneficiaries.
`
Click to expand...
I want to make sure I understand you.

You're saying medicaid has a private insurer option paid for by government subsidy?

And also the traditional government run medicaid option?

And the private medicaid option has been growing in percentage?

Do I understand you correctly?

Edit: Scratch that!

I thought you were speaking of medicaid.

Can you please provide medicare links?

The last time I looked the public medicare providers had a huge share over the private guys - something like 2:1.
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
Calling for additional competitors in a government rigged marketplace (ObamaCare sets the rules for the plans offered) one from which the private sector insurance providers are turning away from. The government is only going to be the new competitor to enter these 'marketplaces', this will represent yet another step to total government control of all facets of healthcare in the nation. Something the government has yet to prove it's capable of doing, let alone doing well.
Click to expand...
If the private for profit insurers were doing this better, wouldn't all the seniors be dumping medicare for private insurers?
 
If you get a quote from Obamacare for whatever coverages, deductibles, offices visits, the whole shebang, then you should have the option to shop that as a voucher to get what else you feel a better deal, elsewhere, as primary coverage, requiring hospitals meet primary health insurance requirements. That, IMO, is fair. At the same time, offer universal health care. Fair is fair. Let the people decide. At least, no matter, everybody is covered. I would also suggest a "I ain't got no money" pool. The pool is of those that meet income requirements where the most profitable companies pay into the pool. No reason to not be covered. Keep a healthy people for both family and productive contribution.
 
Chomsky said:
I want to make sure I understand you.

You're saying medicaid has a private insurer option paid for by government subsidy?
Click to expand...

I was talking about Medicare, but yes Medicaid is also largely privatized. That's called Medicaid managed care and through it most people enrolled in Medicaid programs get their insurance through a private insurer. You can read all about the history of it in MACPAC's inaugural Report to Congress: The Evolution of Managed Care in Medicaid.

There's been a mad rush to get into that business since the ACA passed.

Blue Shield moves into Medicaid with Care1st deal
Molina Healthcare to Acquire Medicaid Assets of Preferred Medical Plan
WellCare buys South Carolina Medicaid plan

Etc.

And also the traditional government run medicaid option?

And the private medicaid option has been growing in percentage?

Do I understand you correctly?
Click to expand...

No, the concept of the traditional government run Medicaid option is largely dead (Medicaid managed care dominates at this point), I was talking about Medicare where it still exists. Private enrollment in Medicare has been growing steadily. Those plans have nearly a third of Medicare's membership at this point.

2052-20-figure-1.png
 
jet57 said:
Well, he can do it now, he's a lame duck with nothing to lose. It's what he was afraid to do when he started this thing.
Click to expand...

He was afraid he would fail to get any reform bill and this proposal most likely will fail. There is no way it will pass Congress, the insurers will see to it. Obama got the insurers and pharma on board for the AHC and it very nearly failed to pass anyway.
 
Greenbeard said:
I was talking about Medicare, but yes Medicaid is also largely privatized. That's called Medicaid managed care and through it most people enrolled in Medicaid programs get their insurance through a private insurer. You can read all about the history of it in MACPAC's inaugural Report to Congress: The Evolution of Managed Care in Medicaid.

There's been a mad rush to get into that business since the ACA passed.

Blue Shield moves into Medicaid with Care1st deal
Molina Healthcare to Acquire Medicaid Assets of Preferred Medical Plan
WellCare buys South Carolina Medicaid plan

Etc.



No, the concept of the traditional government run Medicaid option is largely dead (Medicaid managed care dominates at this point), I was talking about Medicare where it still exists. Private enrollment in Medicare has been growing steadily. Those plans have nearly a third of Medicare's membership at this point.

<edit>
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response, and I earlier edited my previous post to reflect correction of my misunderstanding before I saw this post.

But before I further look at your materials:

In cases like medicaid or medicare where the government is fully subsidizing these plans, are the insurance companies acting trully as insurers? Isn't this more like single-payer, since the government is picking up the tab. Then isn't the insurance company acting more like a for profit administrator?
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
I want to make sure I understand you.

You're saying medicaid has a private insurer option paid for by government subsidy?

And also the traditional government run medicaid option?

And the private medicaid option has been growing in percentage?

Do I understand you correctly?

Edit: Scratch that!

I thought you were speaking of medicaid.

Can you please provide medicare links?

The last time I looked the public medicare providers had a huge share over the private guys - something like 2:1.
Click to expand...


Look up/punch in Medicare Advantage Plans with your zip code.

https://www.medicare.gov/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom