Doc Brown Posted December 15, 2018 Share Posted December 15, 2018 Just now, DC Tom said: Insurance companies are already jacking up premiums, and deductibles. This court decision is irrelevant to that. Really, the most impact would be on the Medicaid expansion. It's academic anyway. This is just a necessary predecessor to getting it in front of the Supreme Court. It doesn't change anything. It changes that it will be brought up again before the Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted December 15, 2018 Share Posted December 15, 2018 On 12/11/2018 at 8:58 AM, Swill Merchant said: It's very complicated, but at its most fundamental level, the problem with health care costs is the intermediary between buyer and seller. The immutable laws of supply and demand naturally reign in runaway costs in a free market. When the consumer does not have a personal stake in the price of services it negates those effects. That is a big part of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2018 Share Posted December 15, 2018 On 12/11/2018 at 6:58 AM, Swill Merchant said: It's very complicated, but at its most fundamental level, the problem with health care costs is the intermediary between buyer and seller. The immutable laws of supply and demand naturally reign in runaway costs in a free market. When the consumer does not have a personal stake in the price of services it negates those effects. I think the issues is the insurance company doesn't bat an eye at paying those massively inflated costs because they say "***** it! We're making shitloads of money!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 15, 2018 Share Posted December 15, 2018 OBAMACARE, RIP, JUDGE DECLARES UNCONSTITUTIONAL WITHOUT TAX More: How strong is this evening’s ruling? It is premised on the fact that Congress has repealed the penalty assessed against those who decline to buy health insurance: U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Fort Worth sided with the argument put forward by a coalition of Republican-leaning states, led by Texas, that Obamacare could no longer stand now that there’s no penalty for Americans who don’t buy insurance. The U.S. Supreme Court had upheld the law in 2012, by classifying the legislation as a tax. But since Congress removed the individual mandate in 2017, O’Connor ruled, there’s no way the ACA can be allowed to stand. “The Individual Mandate can no longer be fairly read as an exercise of Congress’s Tax Power and is still impermissible under the Interstate Commerce Clause — meaning the Individual Mandate is unconstitutional,” O’Connor wrote. “The Individual Mandate is essential to and inseverable from the remainder of the ACA.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 16, 2018 Share Posted December 16, 2018 Sen. Chris Murphy rushes to slam GOP over potential lost health plans, trips HARD over Obama He’s on to us! Peter Daou knows GOP wants to take away people’s health care because a black president ‘gave’ it to them This is the kind of 'thought' that Gator, Peace, 34, and Whitewalker spit out . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 17, 2018 Share Posted December 17, 2018 Obamacare was always at heart a bad-faith proposition. The individual mandate penalty was never a tax, and everyone knows it. The exchanges were never about fostering competition, and everyone knows that, too. The entire scheme was cynical. A Federal Judge Finally Exposes The Lies At The Heart Of Obamacare .. Obamacare was sold to the American people under false pretenses and upheld by a dishonest Supreme Court ruling. Now it's coming apart, and it's about time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 On 12/14/2018 at 11:02 PM, Doc Brown said: Pry goes to the Supreme Court on appeal and law is upheld by Roberts again. Meanwhile, Trump and the GOP will have to explain how they praised the decision by the judge in Texas which if upheld will result in insurance companies jacking up the premiums or denying those with preexisting conditions. Something the GOP promised wouldn't happen before the midterms. Should be interesting to watch. Striking down things like the preexisting conditions and other “good” aspects of the ACA, as well as those that were not working and that the Rs didn’t fix when they had the chance, will be front and center in 2020. The SC case will be argued and/or decided during the 2020 campaign. Probably good for for Ds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Benjamin Franklin said: Striking down things like the preexisting conditions and other “good” aspects of the ACA, as well as those that were not working and that the Rs didn’t fix when they had the chance, will be front and center in 2020. The SC case will be argued and/or decided during the 2020 campaign. Probably good for for Ds. From organic deodorants to organic lubes, it's clear that there's an expanding market for organic health products, including feminine hygiene products. But what exactly does "organic" mean when it comes to tampons and what difference does it make? Dr. Michael Fitch, a family medicine doctor who specializes in women's health, explains that because the ***** is a thin mucus membrane, it absorbs toxins and chemicals more easily than your outer skin. For this reason, women might prefer to use organic tampons to limit exposure to pesticides, dyes, and toxins. Dr. Fitch says that while many diseases are linked to inflammation from toxic chemical exposures, it's still unclear how much toxins are absorbed from tampons. ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW ADVERTISEMENT SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT Dr. Nita Landry OB/GYN and co-host of The Doctors, says that there is no data proving that organic tampons are any safer than regular tampons. However, with that being said, she says "If you feel that you experience less vaginal irritation when you use organic tampons, go for it!" Also, keep in mind that tampons are still regulated by the FDA for consumer safety, so it's not like regular tampons are black-market, ticking time bombs in your body compared to their organic counterparts. The main difference between typical, store-bought tampons and organic tampons comes down to material. Dr. Fitch explains that your non-organic tampon will be constructed using a mix of non-organic materials like rayon and chlorine-bleached cotton. These materials are used for their ability to absorb high amounts of menstrual blood and control smell. Organic tampons should use 100% cotton, and not have been exposed to pesticides, dyes, and toxins. However, "organic" doesn't necessarily mean "all natural and free of any chemicals whatsoever." Dr. Fitch says if you want a dye-free (not just chlorine-bleach free, as most organic tampons are), and 100% cotton, make sure to research the product and that they're not just slapping an "organic" sticker on there like a marketing tool. Sounds basic, but you'd be surprised at the number of "natural" tampons that get lumped together with "organic" tampons. Dr. Nita says if consumers want to buy organic tampons, they should look for USDA-recognized organic certifications, such as Quality Assurance International (QAI) and the Global Organic Textile Standard(GOTS). And of course, tampons still need to be changed every 4-6 hours, regardless of if they're organic or non-organic. Just because they're fancier, it doesn't mean you're no longer at risk of Toxic Shock Syndrome. Dr. Nita says the risk of TSS is the same for organic tampons and regular tampons. "The risk of Toxic Shock Syndrome has more to do with your tampon's absorbency level and how long you wear a single tampon," she explains. ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW 1. Lola MYLOLA.COM If you're patient enough to wait for a subscription box, try Lola tampons. The build-your-own-box subscription means you can customize your pack to be as filled with light, regular, or super tampons as your cycle needs. They offer 100% organic cotton, biodegradable tampons in BPA-free plastic applicators, or applicator-free tampons. The tampons are free of synthetic fibers, chemical additives, fragrance, dyes, and chlorine bleach. BUY NOW Lola, LOLA, $10 for a box of 18 Available in applicator or non-applicator versions. Light, regular, and super absorbencies available as well. 2. Seventh Generation Organic Cotton Tampons AMAZON Seventh Generation might be available in your supermarket or pharmacy, so points there for convenience. These tampons use certified organic cotton, and have no fragrances, deodorants, or chlorine processing. The applicator is made with 95% plant-based materials and contains no BPA. BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, SEVENTH GENERATION (Available on Amazon), $5 for a box of 16 ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW Available in applicator or non-applicator versions. Regular, super, and super absorbency options available as well. 3. L Organic TARGET These chic tampons are more than just eye-candy. The tampons are made with GOTS certified organic cotton, and is free of rayon, pesticides, fragrances, chlorine, and dyes. The applicators are BPA free and plant-based as well (though they don't specify what percentage). Plus, for every sale of a feminine care product, the company will donate an organic pad to a girl in a developing country. You can also get them at Target IRL (of course you can). BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, L. (Available on Amazon), $23 for a box of 30 Applicator version only. Regular or super absorbency options available as well. 4. Natracare AMAZON These are the OG organic tampon. As the world's first fully certified organic cotton tampons, Natracare knows what its doing. Their tampons are 100% cotton, perfume and chlorine free, and biodegradable. Sure, they might not be the cutest, but they're a fan favorite (peep all those positive Amazon reviews) and relatively cheap if you buy in bulk online. ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, NATRACARE (Available on Amazon), $14 for two boxes of 16 tampons (32 total) Available in applicator or non-applicator versions. Regular, super, and super plus absorbencies available as well. 5. The Honest Company AMAZON These hypoallergenic tampons are made with 100% GOTS certified organic cotton, and made without rayon, polyester, fragrances, deodorants or chlorine. The applicator is made of plant derived materials as well. BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, THE HONEST COMPANY (Available on Amazon), $13 for a box of 16 Available in applicator or non-applicator versions. Regular, super, and super plus absorbencies available as well. 6. Cora AMAZON These 100% certified organic tampons are non-GMO, and free of pesticides, chlorine, fragrance, and toxins. The applicator is fully recyclable and BPA-free as well. Plus, for every month's supply of Cora sold, the company will provide a month's supply of pads and health education to girls from India, Kenya, and the U.S. BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, CORA (Available on Amazon), $15 for two boxes of 18 (36 total) ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW Available with applicator or non-applicator versions. Light, regular, and super absorbencies available as well. 7. Organyc AMAZON If you're looking to make the least impact on Mother Earth, try Organyc tamps.These tampons are made entirely of 100% biodegradable and compostable organic cotton bleached without chlorine. It's got a cardboard applicator, BUT it has a rounded tip, so it's better than those vending machine nightmares of mini cardboard toilet paper tubes. BUY NOW Organic Cotton Tampons, ORGANYC (Available on Amazon), $5 for a box of 16. Available with applicator or non-applicator versions. Regular, super, and super plus absorbencies available as well. 8. Bon AMAZON These tampons are made of 100% organic GOTS-certified cotton, and are grown free of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, insecticides, or bleaches. There are no dyes or fragrances either. The tampons are non-applicator only and come in a cute cardboard tube that can "withstand the harshest of handbag environments." BUY NOW Certified Organic Tampons, BON (Available on Amazon), $26 for three boxes of 16 (48 total). Non-applicator version only. Light, regular, and super absorbencies available as well. Follow Carina on Twitter. read next What to Know About the #BelieveSurvivors Walkout Is the 'Crazy Rich Asians' Sequel Happening? SPONSORED STORIES OGIO Rogue BackpackBodyBuilding.com Why Analysts Are Predicting A New Cannabis BoomalertOilPrice.com Dog Behaviors Explains! This Is What It Means When Dogs Follow You Into The Bathroomanimalchannel.co [Pics] Yes, These Walmart Shoppers Actually Left The House Like Thischeezburger by MORE FROMSEX & RELATIONSHIPS DO YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE BEING GHOSTED ON? WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT DATING A GEMINI MAN ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW WHEN GUYS KNOW THEY'RE READY TO SAY "I LOVE YOU" WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT DATING A TAURUS MAN WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT DATING AN ARIES MAN GIFTS FOR THE MEN WHO ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO SHOP FOR THESE IRL SANTACON STORIES WILL CURE YOUR HANGOVER IS TINDER GOLD ACTUALLY WORTH PAYING FOR? SHOULD YOU PLAN THE WEDDING BEFORE YOU'RE ENGAGED? SOUND THE ALARM: IT'S OFFICIALLY "BREAKUP SEASON" SEX & RELATIONSHIPS THE 14 BEST ORGANIC AND NATURAL SKINCARE BRANDS WE'RE OBSESSED WITH THESE 5 ORGANIC MAKEUP BRANDS THE 9 BEST ORGANIC PADS 10 NATURAL AND ORGANIC SUNSCREENS FOR SUMMER APPARENTLY NO ONE'S REALLY SURE IF YOUR TAMPONS ARE SAFE 9 NATURAL DEODORANTS THAT ACTUALLY WORK Newsletter Digital Editions About Us Press Room Contact Us Community Guidelines Advertise Online Cosmo Books Work For Cosmo Customer Service BestProducts Subscribe Other Hearst Subscriptions Give a Gift Events & Promotions Giveaways A Part of Hearst Digital MediaCosmopolitan participates in various affiliate marketing programs, which means we may get paid commissions on editorially chosen products purchased through our links to retailer sites.©2018 Hearst Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Notice Your California Privacy Rights Interest-Based Ads Terms of Use Site Map Wanna stay on top of all the sh*t you actually care about? Sign up now. OBVIOUSLYI'M BORING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 Boyst, you missed the point entirely. Why quote BF and then give a dissertation on tampons when all you needed was a definition of douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 4 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: Boyst, you missed the point entirely. Why quote BF and then give a dissertation on tampons when all you needed was a definition of douchebag. Because that B word sounded like he was on the rag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 26, 2018 Share Posted December 26, 2018 ON THE UPSIDE, THIS SAVED THE SYSTEM MONEY: Hospital readmission reduction program linked to heart failure, pneumonia deaths. Government 'help' strikes again. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpberr Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 You know what one area the government could improve with their heavy hand of regulation? School physical education. It is an absolute farce today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-baby! Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, dpberr said: You know what one area the government could improve with their heavy hand of regulation? School physical education. It is an absolute farce today. Yep, just look at all the fat kids on sports teams these days. Sad. (Obviously kids and parents play a roll as well) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 24 minutes ago, dpberr said: You know what one area the government could improve with their heavy hand of regulation? School physical education. It is an absolute farce today. Or the government could, as many Blue States have done, is launch public health campaigns against smoking, sugar and salt. Why is smoking rates so much higher in red states? Now who would be against educating the public against these health hazards? hmmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 48 minutes ago, dpberr said: You know what one area the government could improve with their heavy hand of regulation? School physical education. It is an absolute farce today. I miss climbing the rope in gym class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted December 27, 2018 Share Posted December 27, 2018 5 hours ago, BigMcD said: Yep, just look at all the fat kids on sports teams these days. Sad. (Obviously kids and parents play a roll as well) I noticed, while checking plans for my HS Reunion online, that 7 out of 10 current cheerleaders on the homepage were OBESE. Quite a change since I remember one of my friends complaining about the strict weight/size requirements she had to endure to stay on the squad when I was a teenager. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 28, 2018 Share Posted December 28, 2018 MORE: WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING, BESIDES EVERYONE WITH A BRAIN? It Sure Looks Like This Obamacare Program Has Led to More People Dying: Under the health law, Medicare started penalizing hospitals for too many readmissions. Now mortality rates are up. But remember, if you opposed ObamaCare, it was because you wanted people to die. All the best thought leaders said so. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 28, 2018 Share Posted December 28, 2018 1 hour ago, B-Man said: MORE: WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING, BESIDES EVERYONE WITH A BRAIN? It Sure Looks Like This Obamacare Program Has Led to More People Dying: Under the health law, Medicare started penalizing hospitals for too many readmissions. Now mortality rates are up. But remember, if you opposed ObamaCare, it was because you wanted people to die. All the best thought leaders said so. It's called perverse incentive, and any policy wonk or politician who down plays it's existence, and very real impacts, are far more interested in political outcomes than actual solutions. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted December 28, 2018 Share Posted December 28, 2018 On 12/27/2018 at 8:29 AM, dpberr said: You know what one area the government could improve with their heavy hand of regulation? School physical education. It is an absolute farce today. Here in Illinois, Phys Ed is a mandated class K-12. In many states it no longer is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedge Posted December 28, 2018 Share Posted December 28, 2018 16 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: Here in Illinois, Phys Ed is a mandated class K-12. In many states it no longer is. Gotta try to keep the kids in shape there, so they have a fighting chance against the clergy. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 On 12/10/2018 at 11:29 AM, B-Man said: WHY IS OBAMACARE ENROLLMENT DOWN? WONDERS THE NYT. Turns out it’s expensive, there are better alternatives, people don’t like it, and it isn’t mandatory anymore. . Don't worry, NYT. Your leader is going to pick up the tab for people who can't afford health costs...including illegals. New York. Trying to out-California California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 California to New York. Hold my beer. "Now we just need to get rid of the electoral college..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 (edited) 36 minutes ago, LABillzFan said: California to New York. Hold my beer. "Now we just need to get rid of the electoral college..." I don't think the Dems/Left really care if this is worthwhile policy that will help people within the framework of our Republic anymore. They just want to burn the whole mother***** down. Edited January 9, 2019 by Gavin in Va Beach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 1 hour ago, LABillzFan said: California to New York. Hold my beer. "Now we just need to get rid of the electoral college..." It brings up an interesting conundrum. Federal law prohibits the federal government from providing services to illegal immigrants. But not the state governments - they can write their own laws, and legally allow illegal immigrants to participate in state health programs... ...but Medicaid programs are state programs, but funded by federal block grants. I can't wait for that to hit the courts. Ironically, the Democrats could possibly end up strengthening state sovereignty in the intermediate-term...thus unintentionally shooting themselves in the foot when they try to push through socialized medicine on a national level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 WHY NOT PRIVATIZE THE WHOLE THING? V.A. Will Spend Billions on Private Health Care. “The most significant change in caring for our veterans in decades.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 45 minutes ago, B-Man said: WHY NOT PRIVATIZE THE WHOLE THING? V.A. Will Spend Billions on Private Health Care. “The most significant change in caring for our veterans in decades.” I'm a vet and use the VA for medical care. I live about an hour from the VA facility that I've used for about 10 years. I don't have the complaints that some people do, but I venture to guess that it has a lot to do with the particular facility and its patient load. They do outsource certain care and in my case my care was outsourced to the same private medical group that I had seen prior to opting for VA care. In my facility they "keep the trains running on time" and I've never waited longer than 5 minutes for an appointment. The staff appears to care a lot. My only issue is that the turnover is too high as I've had five different primary care professionals in those 10 years. Those professionals were either MD's, NP's or PA's. If I have the need to seek medical assistance right away there's an MD staffed emergency room that gets me to a bed in 30 minutes or less. Generally speaking, I have no real complaints regarding the VA, but I might have a different opinion if I lived elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 O.o https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1087584893817651200 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 If you like your bench you can keep your bench Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 States that didn't accept the Obamacare funds are closing rural clinics leaving Trump voters without healthcare. As all as they had to do was accept the damn money! https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/12/27/tenncare-rural-health-care-issues-tennessee/2349379002/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 On 1/14/2019 at 10:02 AM, B-Man said: WHY NOT PRIVATIZE THE WHOLE THING? V.A. Will Spend Billions on Private Health Care. “The most significant change in caring for our veterans in decades.” Yes - Vets get healthcare from taxpayers for their service...so we are paying....if you privatize VA HC fully you will INCREASE the cost to the taxpayer as we have the highest cost of HC in the world - and more expensive than VA/medicare.... So why not - like increased taxes huh? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 Citizens are waking up. Voter support for “Medicare for All” has collapsed by 50 percent over the last month, according to polling from Politico/Morning Consult. Until this month, the Democrats’ single-payer “Medicare for All” scheme enjoyed majority support in this same poll going back months. But now that the ugly details of the program are actually being debated and publicized, net approval for the scheme has been cut in half. “From January to February, net support for single-payer health system fell over 50% to 12 points,” the pollster reports. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 20 minutes ago, B-Man said: Citizens are waking up. Voter support for “Medicare for All” has collapsed by 50 percent over the last month, according to polling from Politico/Morning Consult. Until this month, the Democrats’ single-payer “Medicare for All” scheme enjoyed majority support in this same poll going back months. But now that the ugly details of the program are actually being debated and publicized, net approval for the scheme has been cut in half. “From January to February, net support for single-payer health system fell over 50% to 12 points,” the pollster reports. Polling questions are important. People may think Medicare for all is a good idea until they're asked what they think of it when all private insurance is eliminated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 1 minute ago, grinreaper said: Polling questions are important. People may think Medicare for all is a good idea until they're asked what they think of it when all private insurance is eliminated. Exactly. and that is what several 2020 candidates have signed onto. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Fat chance it would pass in good old USA ´Medicare for All´ would require obesity laws by Tiana Lowe Original Article . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 34 minutes ago, B-Man said: Fat chance it would pass in good old USA ´Medicare for All´ would require obesity laws by Tiana Lowe Original Article . Nope, pre-existing condition. Oh wait a minute, government control over the what the people eat and weigh - yes! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) Confirmed: CBO's projections on the consequences of Obamacare repeal were disastrously wrong I realize that Republicans' failed "repeal and replace" adventure feels like ancient history at this point -- especially with Democrats increasingly embracing their next reckless healthcare scheme -- but going back to review the record can occasionally be quite illuminating. You may recall that one of the rhetorical lynchpins of the Left's anti-repeal fear mongering was the ubiquitous assertion that "millions" would "lose healthcare" if the GOP had succeeded in their legislative effort. I spent quite a lot of energy during that debate debunking various claims and checking facts. One of the major points I emphasized was that the projections of "lost coverage" relied on extremely questionable analyses from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office: Fully 73 percent of "lost" coverage would arise from individuals making a choice to exit the marketplace after the federal government ceased requiring every American to purchase insurance. CBO analysts apparently believe the mandate has mystical influence over consumers' decisions, unlike other incentives built into Republican bills -- such as a surcharge for non-continuous coverage, or a six-month waiting period to obtain plans for people with nonexistent or lapsed coverage. The folly of this approach is exposed by the second factor Roy mentions, which accounts for almost all of CBO's remaining coverage differential between Obamacare and various replacement plans: The "outdated baseline." What does that mean? Put simply, CBO has always vastly overestimated how many people would be compelled by the individual mandate tax to purchase plans. Even as their projections have been disproven by actual Obamacare sign-ups, CBO hasn't sufficiently updated their expectations to reflect, well, reality. They've instead rooted their latest analyses in 2016 projections that have already been debunked by real-life results, to the tune of millions of people. My point was that of the big, scary "lost coverage" number (in the ballpark of 23 million people), almost all of it was based on a combination of (a) estimates of people choosing to forego Obamacare plans if they weren't required to buy them, and (b) CBO's wildly and provably inaccurate enrollment projections. In the excerpt above, I reference "Roy," as in healthcare wonk Avik Roy, who'd been beating the drum on this very same issue. Another flaw he raised was CBO's bizarre assumption that if Obamacare's individual mandate tax were repealed, millions of people would supposedly drop their Medicaid coverage, which was costing them nothing out-of-pocket. Anyway, I've rehashed these arguments because new government data confirms that CBO's number crunchers were, indeed, catastrophically wrong: {snip} In guessing the enrollment impact of axing the individual mandate tax on both the exchanges and Medicaid, CBO was off by more than...15 million people. "While any CBO analysis of the Republican bills was likely to project large coverage losses due to the cuts to Medicaid and subsidies, if CBO had more realistic assumptions about the mandate, the numbers would have been significantly smaller, and perhaps left more room to convince centrist Republicans to get on board," Klein writes. More at the link: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/02/22/surprise-cbos-estimates-on-the-wages-of-obamacare-repeal-were-disastrously-wrong-n2542010 Edited February 22, 2019 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Because this will be "affordable":New ‘Medicare-for-all’ bill would largely outlaw private insurance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 7 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Because this will be "affordable":New ‘Medicare-for-all’ bill would largely outlaw private insurance i think we all know what they mean by, 'largely'. everyone but us, congress critters, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Trump’s proposed Medicare cuts put health care at center of 2020 race President Trump’s call for more than $845 billion in reductions for the federal health program teed up a potential battle between Democratic proposals for Medicare-for-all and a kind of Medicare-for-less approach from Republicans who are focused on cutting back on spending. By Toluse Olorunnipa and Sean Sullivan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted March 26, 2019 Share Posted March 26, 2019 Justice Department sides with court ruling Obamacare invalid The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Monday announced that it is siding with a district court ruling that found the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional. </snip> 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts