• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

MN Democrat Gov. Obamacare not affordable.

ludin said:
Democratic Minnesota governor says ObamaCare 'no longer affordable' | Fox News

Well looks like someone is even saying what we already knew. The supposed affordable care act is not so affordable after all.
Click to expand...

You know what makes me laugh about that? Yes, I realize the percentage increases in Minnesota have been really high, but the prices are not even in the same galaxy as Alaska.

In 2015, the average bronze premium for a 40-year old non-smoker in was $195 in Minnesota. The same year, the same bronze premium averaged $475 in Alaska. Source.

So while I respect Minnesota's concerns, it doesn't really light a passionate fire under my ass considering what we're battling up here. I'm happy to hear they're making some noise about it, because we need the same reforms they need, it's just that we need them about a thousand times more urgently.
 
Why did these politicians not listen to all of the very smart people, experts, who warned before it was voted on that Obamacare can not work? You didn't even have to be a well educated person to know that. A sixth grader doing basic math could have told us that Obamacare would fail.
 
This is great news. Let's all hope ACA fails, so millions of lower and middle class no longer have Health Insurance. So then they'll either lose everything and go bankrupt because of a catastrophic sickness, or they just show up at the hospital with no insurance and the tax payers and people WITH health insurance will be paying for them anyway.

How about Congress gets together and fixes it, instead of junking it and going back to the mess it was before? But that means they might actually work together, for the good of the working man. Nah, can't have that. The Republicans are too busy voting to defund ACA 50-60 times, whatever.

BUT YEAH!!! Because of politics lets root against the little guy, yet again.
 
Neomalthusian said:
You know what makes me laugh about that? Yes, I realize the percentage increases in Minnesota have been really high, but the prices are not even in the same galaxy as Alaska.

In 2015, the average bronze premium for a 40-year old non-smoker in was $195 in Minnesota. The same year, the same bronze premium averaged $475 in Alaska. Source.

So while I respect Minnesota's concerns, it doesn't really light a passionate fire under my ass considering what we're battling up here. I'm happy to hear they're making some noise about it, because we need the same reforms they need, it's just that we need them about a thousand times more urgently.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't you look also at income
From a quick search the average income in Alaska is $69,825 and Minnesota is $ 58,476. That is $11,349 per year diff. The cost of living is higher in AK. Hence your medical, gas, food, etc is going to be higher. It is not surprising to me that AK health insurance is higher than the lower 48.

A concern I have in AZ is the amount of insurance companies pulling out of the ACA. Also the costs are going up with the ones that remain. Seems not enough young healthy people are signing up under ACA to help off set costs.
 
mike2810 said:
Shouldn't you look also at income

From a quick search the average income in Alaska is $69,825 and Minnesota is $ 58,476. That is $11,349 per year diff. The cost of living is higher in AK. Hence your medical, gas, food, etc is going to be higher. It is not surprising to me that AK health insurance is higher than the lower 48.
Click to expand...

Of course it would be higher here, but we're not talking 20% more expensive health insurance along with 20% higher median incomes. We're talking about 140% more expensive health insurance to go along with that 20% higher median income.

Let me paint a picture in the form of an example: a 60-year old couple that makes $80,000 or more a year (no employer offer of insurance, e.g., independent family business) would have to spend $36,000 to insure themselves with a bronze plan.

Think I'm exaggerating?
 
mike2810 said:
Shouldn't you look also at income
From a quick search the average income in Alaska is $69,825 and Minnesota is $ 58,476. That is $11,349 per year diff. The cost of living is higher in AK. Hence your medical, gas, food, etc is going to be higher. It is not surprising to me that AK health insurance is higher than the lower 48.

A concern I have in AZ is the amount of insurance companies pulling out of the ACA. Also the costs are going up with the ones that remain. Seems not enough young healthy people are signing up under ACA to help off set costs.
Click to expand...

That is the "death spiral" that every realistically-thinking person warned about before Obamacare was signed.
 
Neomalthusian said:
Of course it would be higher here, but we're not talking 20% more expensive health insurance along with 20% higher median incomes. We're talking about 140% more expensive health insurance to go along with that 20% higher median income.

Let me paint a picture in the form of an example: a 60-year old couple that makes $80,000 or more a year (no employer offer of insurance, e.g., independent family business) would have to spend $36,000 to insure themselves with a bronze plan.

Think I'm exaggerating?
Click to expand...

So what your saying ACA is not working for you in AK.
 
The Man said:
That is the "death spiral" that every realistically-thinking person warned about before Obamacare was signed.
Click to expand...

I am thankful I do not have to use the exchanges. I have insurance through my employer even though I am retired. Rates have gone up some, but not all that bad. (Federal Employee Health Benefits).
 
mike2810 said:
So what your saying ACA is not working for you in AK.
Click to expand...

Its effect here is extremely bipolar. For those who qualify for the law's subsidies, it's a godsend, both for the individual/family and state as a whole, as it flings a great deal of our high costs to the feds instead of our fiscally-embattled state and its residents.

For those who don't qualify for the law's subsidies, and for employers who (think they) have to pay the going rate to insure their employees, it's not working at all, and in some cases is outright catastrophic. You saw the prices we pay. People ineligible for subsidies would almost always be smarter to refuse to buy it and go uninsured.

The inequality created by the law up here, where you're either in the "wow what a godsend" group or the "we're going to need to move out of state because of this catastrophe" group. This is why I roll my eyes when people cite statistical averages about how great the law is. Citing an average does not illustrate our bloodbath up here.
 
Last edited:
Neomalthusian said:
You know what makes me laugh about that? Yes, I realize the percentage increases in Minnesota have been really high, but the prices are not even in the same galaxy as Alaska.

In 2015, the average bronze premium for a 40-year old non-smoker in was $195 in Minnesota. The same year, the same bronze premium averaged $475 in Alaska. Source.

So while I respect Minnesota's concerns, it doesn't really light a passionate fire under my ass considering what we're battling up here. I'm happy to hear they're making some noise about it, because we need the same reforms they need, it's just that we need them about a thousand times more urgently.
Click to expand...

I know prices every where have spiked which is why calling it affordable care is a joke.
Just now democrats are starting to turn and complain.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
This is great news. Let's all hope ACA fails, so millions of lower and middle class no longer have Health Insurance. So then they'll either lose everything and go bankrupt because of a catastrophic sickness, or they just show up at the hospital with no insurance and the tax payers and people WITH health insurance will be paying for them anyway.

How about Congress gets together and fixes it, instead of junking it and going back to the mess it was before? But that means they might actually work together, for the good of the working man. Nah, can't have that. The Republicans are too busy voting to defund ACA 50-60 times, whatever.

BUT YEAH!!! Because of politics lets root against the little guy, yet again.
Click to expand...

Umm people were warned from the beginning that this would happen.
You can fix crap. That is exactly what the aca was crap.

Scrapping it is the only way to fix it.

Yep democrats did that when they passed their unaffordable care act.
 
MaggieD said:
Most of Congress' time is taken up by fixing what they broke. This will be no exception.
Click to expand...

There is no fixing this. You can only replace it.
 
ludin said:
There is no fixing this. You can only replace it.
Click to expand...

There is, actually. Speaking strictly from a policy standpoint, the fixes are conceptually extremely easy. Eliminate the employer mandate and penalty, change the subsidy cutoff from 400% of FPL to 800% of FPL and smooth it after that, require any employer that for whatever reason wants to offer health insurance to be required to offer it to the whole family at employer cost less than 9% of income, and prohibit insurance networking.

More would be needed but that would be a huge leap forward in fixing the cluster**** aspects.

If any of that sounds confusing or you're not sure what I mean, just ask, I'm happy to explain any of that.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
If it's scrapped there will be no replacement. Republicans have made it painfully clear they don't get a rats ass about any class but the upper class.
Click to expand...

This is a lazy argument. Have you read the health care reform proposals advanced by Republicans since PPACA was passed? Can you explain the specific ways in which they don't accomplish their stated objective? There are indeed shortcomings of those alternative proposals, but do you even know what those shortcomings are? Can you lay out the reasons the following were all non-viable, non-workable and wouldn't have benefited "any class but the upper class?"

Patient's Choice Act
Cantor-Camp Plan
Improving Health Care for All Americans Act
Boehner Substitute
Broun Plan
Ryan-Wyden Plan
Empowering Patients First Act
American Health Care Reform Act of 2013
Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility and Empowerment Act

I mean yeah maybe those all just suck. But why do they? Can you explain why they do? Or are you just repeating Democratic Party talking points?
 
Last edited:
SenorXm/Sirius said:
If it's scrapped there will be no replacement. Republicans have made it painfully clear they don't get a rats ass about any class but the upper class.
Click to expand...

And you have no proof of this but you bias is noted.
 
Neomalthusian said:
There is, actually. Speaking strictly from a policy standpoint, the fixes are conceptually extremely easy. Eliminate the employer mandate and penalty, change the subsidy cutoff from 400% of FPL to 800% of FPL and smooth it after that, require any employer that for whatever reason wants to offer health insurance to be required to offer it to the whole family at employer cost less than 9% of income, and prohibit insurance networking.

More would be needed but that would be a huge leap forward in fixing the cluster**** aspects.

If any of that sounds confusing or you're not sure what I mean, just ask, I'm happy to explain any of that.
Click to expand...

That is just continue to pile on the crap that is already there.
No there needs to be a total replacement that works for everyone and actually lowers cost.
 
ludin said:
That is just continue to pile on the crap that is already there.
Click to expand...

You're not really convincing me you have a grasp on the policy and how it works and affects people. Explain specifically in policy and/or economic terms why the fixes I suggested merely "pile on the crap."

No there needs to be a total replacement that works for everyone and actually lowers cost.
Click to expand...

And similarly, explain in policy and/or economic terms specifically what that replacement would do. There are indeed options, but what exactly do you propose? "Let 'em sell across state lines and promote competition" is far too broad of a brush and doesn't cut it. If you can do this, I would probably be in support of that too, because like you, I want something that works for everyone and actually lowers costs.
 
Neomalthusian said:
You're not really convincing me you have a grasp on the policy and how it works and affects people. Explain specifically in policy and/or economic terms why the fixes I suggested merely "pile on the crap."
Click to expand...

It is just a different more expanded version of the bogus law we have now. it doesn't actually fix anything to make healthcare more affordable.
The problem of healthcare is cost. the government expanding a horrible program doesn't make it cheaper it makes it more expensive.

And similarly, explain in policy and/or economic terms specifically what that replacement would do. There are indeed options, but what exactly do you propose? "Let 'em sell across state lines and promote competition" is far too broad of a brush and doesn't cut it. If you can do this, I would probably be in support of that too, because like you, I want something that works for everyone and actually lowers costs.
Click to expand...

I would take a model similar to Singapore. They basically have a massive HSA system.

So my system would work similar. companies and corporations can put money into an HSA account. the government issues a credit every year to the accounts in the amount of 5k.
Companies who contribute up to 10k get a dollar for dollar deduction. if they contribute > 10k they get a bonus deduction.

You can spend the money one whatever you would like. The only plans that insurance companies would need would be catastrophic healthcare plans.
You would be responsible for daily doctor visits etc ...

doctors and hospitals are providing huge discounts up to 90% off if you can pony up cash instead of going through insurance.
a hospital advertises a CT at 4k dollars your insurance to the rescue charges 2.4k. cash? 250 bucks. an abdominal scan cash 1k dollars vs 3k for insurance.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
LOL. I was a Republican for 30+ years. I've seen it 1st hand, and it is one of the reasons I am no longer a Republican.
Click to expand...

LOL yeah right. no one spouts the stuff you do was a republican at all.
The fact is the unaffordable care act has driven the cost of healthcare through the roof and the only
solution democrats can come up with is more government and more taxes like it worked this time.
 
ludin said:
LOL yeah right. no one spouts the stuff you do was a republican at all.
Click to expand...

Nowadays? Saying I'm not a Republican is a compliment. Thank you. Actually modern Republicans like you are the phonies. They don't represent ANYTHING that the GOP of the past stood for. It use to be the party of the working man. Not anymore.

Now it's the party of, Donald Trump!! LOL That's all that needs to be said to show how offtrack and lost the current GOP is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom