Support NeoGAF

[sangreal]

Rachel Maddow MSNBC‏Verified account @maddow 5m5 minutes ago

should've listed the red states which this will impact the most instead

 

[Karsticles]

It isn't disingenuous. Their presence on the rolls and their premium payments are necessary to the whole thing. Even the republicans recognize this fact. Losing healthy people is very, very bad.

If someone would prefer not to purchase healthcare, it is disingenuous to refer to "losing". "Dropping" would be more accurate.

I agree it's necessary to have healthy people on to subsidize the sick.

I'm sure they're going to agree with that when they voluntarily drop the insurance, get sick and die because they don't have the money to pay for healthcare.

Yep. That's exactly what will happen. Thank god the GOP was there to give them the choice.

I'm purely talking about the language being used, not what's best or what is a wise choice.

Man, this is probably the weirdest defense I've read for this yet.

There's no defense - I'm asking for a language clarification.

It's still considered a "loss" because those people are losing healthcare and the market is losing those premiums. Regardless of whether they want healthcare or not, it's necessary for younger healthy people to pay into the system for it to actually work.

Why not say they would "drop" their insurance instead of "lose" it, then?

insurance works by having large numbers of people paying into a system, even when healthy, so that the money flowing in can pay for the care of whoever needs it at any given time. expanding health care coverage essential means forcing everyone in society to be involved, whether via a mandate or tax revenue directly paying for a public option/single-payer system.


edit:also, yeah accidents and other unexpected care. if you didn't want health insurance, but then you go to the ER for some surprise health issue or accident, suddenly the system is facing the prospect of eating the costs of saving your life, which in turn would have to be baked into the costs charged for everything else. being willing to take your chances doesn't really make you immortal.

I'm just asking for language clarification.

There are literally zero people that don't want healthcare. There are people that can afford it, people who can't afford it, and people who can afford it but have other priorities. Oh, and people who get it heavily subsidized by their employer instead of the government

The rejection of the ACA was not because people want to die when they get sick or because they think they can afford cancer treatment without any coverage. People who previously had insurance hate the ACA because prices went up. People who didn't, hate the ACA because the coverage is expensive and most plans have shifted to the Republican model of HDHP+HSA which doesn't help most people so they end up paying for nothing. People who could afford it but refuse to because "it won't happen to me" and they would rather buy other luxuries are just shortsighted, not suicidal. People who couldn't afford it received subsidies. Cheap businesses hated the ACA because healthcare is expensive and labor is plentiful so they don't want to cover their employees

None of these groups had the position of "who needs healthcare anyway?"

There was a time in my life where I said "no thanks" to health insurance because it added a little to my paycheck, and I had no interest. If I had millions of dollars I wouldn't have gotten it. So I don't think this is true.

The vast majority didn't just get insurance because of the fine. The majority on ACA are getting tax credits. With those generous tax credits going away most of them will effectively lose coverage due to not being able to afford it.

Right, and those people are definitely "losing" their health insurance, I would say.

FUCK THIS.

14 million people will lose it from MEDICAID.

7 million will lose it from EMPLOYER INSURANCE

2 million from the ACA Marketplaces

1 million from other.

And for the record, the 2 million losing from the ACA Marketplace aka non-group insurance will be old people losing insurance they NEED and WANT and being replaces by young, well off healthy people who currently pay the mandate fine instead of insurance.

Chill out. It's just a question.

Not that many, IMO. The penalty is easily avoided so long as your employer does not offer you a plan and the least expensive marketplace plan in your state exceeds 8% of your income.

I would guess that the majority of losses will come from Medicaid coverage being dropped and employers dropping plans.

Thank you for being the only person to even attempt to answer my question. I didn't know those factors about the penalty, so that makes sense.

We can talk about how many of those people were forced to buy into insurance, but likewise I'd like to see how many of that group ended up seeing tangible benefits from having that coverage.

When you have it you tend to use it, which is great for preventative care. And those involuntary buyers still had a real safety net in case of problems.

Sure.

You do realize it's saying that up to 24 million people who are currently insured will lose Medicade alone? That's not even taking things such as employer insurance into account. That alone is pretty fucking horrifying. People are going to die if this bill gets passed.

The bill is awful, and I said that in my last post. I don't understand why so many people are up in arms when I agree that ACHA is awful. I just had a simple question.

 

[Maxim726X]

Rachel Maddow MSNBC‏Verified account @maddow 5m5 minutes ago

But... Look at all that freedom!

Thanks, Trump.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Look at all that extra money they are saving to spread amongst the rich people while 24 million poors get to die.

 

[UnObtainium17]

Was there a language in the bill about Euthanasia or assisted suicide? They way thing will go we gonna need it.
Because really I cannot put into words how bad that shit is for us the more i read.

 

[Tranqueris]

should've listed the red states which this will impact the most instead

KY and AR are probably at the very top of the list.

 

[sangreal]

There was a time in my life where I said "no thanks" to health insurance because it added a little to my paycheck, and I had no interest. If I had millions of dollars I wouldn't have gotten it. So I don't think this is true.

First of all, your post said healthcare not health insurance and that is what I was responding to, but let's go with it. I don't argue against the idea that there are plenty of people that choose not to buy health insurance. Both pre and post ACA. My point is that people are doing so because of financial considerations, which is exactly what you stated: "because it added a little to my paycheck" Not because they're cool with the actual consequence of not having coverage.

As for the "if I had millions of dollars" scenario show me one wealthy person without health coverage. You're willing to piss away all your money on one expensive illness? Rich people have more insurance than anyone. The calculus is different for the middle class already in over their heads in debt. What's a little (or lot) more. That of course relies on the myth that hospitals are obligated to treat you

 

[Black Mamba]

If someone would prefer not to purchase healthcare, it is disingenuous to refer to "losing". "Dropping" would be more accurate.

I agree it's necessary to have healthy people on to subsidize the sick.


I'm purely talking about the language being used, not what's best or what is a wise choice.


There's no defense - I'm asking for a language clarification.


Why not say they would "drop" their insurance instead of "lose" it, then?


I'm just asking for language clarification.


There was a time in my life where I said "no thanks" to health insurance because it added a little to my paycheck, and I had no interest. If I had millions of dollars I wouldn't have gotten it. So I don't think this is true.


Right, and those people are definitely "losing" their health insurance, I would say.


Chill out. It's just a question.


Thank you for being the only person to even attempt to answer my question. I didn't know those factors about the penalty, so that makes sense.


Sure.


The bill is awful, and I said that in my last post. I don't understand why so many people are up in arms when I agree that ACHA is awful. I just had a simple question.

Uh, no. I answered your question. You asked how many and I showed where the drops come from.

Mostly medicaid and employer provided insurance. That's 21 of the 24 million. None of these people deal with the mandate at all.

I literally posted the chart that answers your question from the CBO and you ignored the answer.

Anybody who "loses" health insurance is because they can't afford it, not because they don't want it.


edit: The people on medicaid are not "dropping" it in the classical sense. Nor are the employer sponsored people. And this is all semantics, regardless. If you drop insurance because you can no longer afford it, it's not different than losing it.

 

[GTI Guy]

https://youtu.be/tzW2ybYFboQ

What would you do
If you were asked to give up your dreams for freedom
What would you do
If asked to make the ultimate sacrifice
Would you think about all them people
Who gave up everything they had
Would you think about all them War Vets
And would you start to feel bad
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty fuckin' fee
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
What would you do
If someone told you to fight for freedom
Would you answer the call
Or run away like a little pussy
'Cause the only reason that you're here
Is 'cause folks died for you in the past
So maybe now it's your turn
To die kicking some ass
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty fuckin' fee
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
You don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
Oo, buck 'o five
Freedom costs a buck 'o five

 

[djplaeskool]

Fuckin' hell.
I thought 8-10M was going to be the limit.
14 million?
This shit is dead.

 

[MrDaravon]

I work for a not-for-profit HCO (~7 hospitals, 12k employees, 700 MDs) and we're already internally having to drastically cut back on what we are planning to offer moving forward for charity care/financial aid for patients. We already lose money on most Medicaid patients, and I personally see several patients a day getting ongoing care they can ONLY get because of charity care that we offer, and a lot of that care is very expensive and costly (lots of IR-related stuff).

Shit is going to be so fucked.

 

[RoKKeR]

Good luck.

 

[Karsticles]

First of all, your post said healthcare not health insurance and that is what I was responding to, but let's go with it. I don't argue against the idea that there are plenty of people that choose not to buy health insurance. Both pre and post ACA. My point is that people are doing so because of financial considerations, which is exactly what you stated: "because it added a little to my paycheck" Not because they're cool with the actual consequence of not having coverage.

As for the "if I had millions of dollars" scenario show me one wealthy person without health coverage. You're willing to piss away all your money on one expensive illness? Rich people have more insurance than anyone

Fair enough, I had a typo - thanks for pointing that out.

I was cool with not having coverage. I wouldn't have gotten coverage if I were wealthy. I just considered it to be a waste of money in my youth.

Uh, no. I answered your question. You asked how many and I showed where the drops come from.

Mostly medicaid and employer provided insurance. That's 21 of the 24 million. None of these people deal with the mandate at all.

I literally posted the chart that answers your question from the CBO and you ignored the answer.

Anybody who "loses" health insurance is because they can't afford it, not because they don't want it.


edit: The people on medicaid are not "dropping" it in the classical sense. Nor are the employer sponsored people. And this is all semantics, regardless. If you drop insurance because you can no longer afford it, it's not different than losing it.

So about 3 million from the mandate? You're right, you did answer my question. I was just put off by you telling me to fuck off for some strange reason.

I agree that dropping insurance because you can't afford it is the equivalent of losing insurance.

 

[wandering]

I get the feeling it's not going to pass, they'll wash their hands of it, then say they did their best and blame the Democrats for obstructing.

 

[Maxim726X]

So- I'm assuming this is now almost assuredly DOA in the Senate.

If it even makes it past the House.

 

[UnObtainium17]

So- I'm assuming this is now almost assuredly DOA in the Senate.

If it even makes it past the House.

I'm not assuming anything. I thought Trump has ZERO chance of being the president like 12 months ago and look where we are now.

 

[slit]

Fair enough, I had a typo - thanks for pointing that out.

I was cool with not having coverage. I wouldn't have gotten coverage if I were wealthy. I just considered it to be a waste of money in my youth.

Which is why young adults are wet behind the ear and need a mandate so the rest of society doesn't get fucked over.

 

[Black Mamba]

Fair enough, I had a typo - thanks for pointing that out.

I was cool with not having coverage. I wouldn't have gotten coverage if I were wealthy. I just considered it to be a waste of money in my youth.


So about 3 million from the mandate? You're right, you did answer my question. I was just put off by you telling me to fuck off for some strange reason.

I agree that dropping insurance because you can't afford it is the equivalent of losing insurance.

I didn't tell you to fuck off. I said "fuck this," as in "It seems to me that if 14 million people didn't want it before, and will drop it after ACHA, it's a bit disingenuous to frame the situation as people "losing" their insurance." And poor people.

Fuck this! This whole premise. Fuck it! Because it's not correct! So I showed why.


"3 million from the mandate." No. In fact, I'd argue zero. Or close to it. Because almost all the people in the marketplaces dropping insurance are going to be older people who can no longer afford it which you agree is the same as losing it.

The funny thing about the AHCA is that there will be a higher percentage of healthy, younger people in the pool than under the ACA with the mandate. Of course, that was the case pre-ACA too.

So while the marketplaces will drop in amount of people covered, it will also SHIFT who is covered. And the people dropping insurance will almost entirely not be from the mandate because the mandate fine is too small. but almost exclusively from middle aged and almost elderly people who can no longer afford it.

 

[cdyhybrid]

The Failing TrumpCare

 

[Maxim726X]

I'm not assuming anything. I thought Trump has ZERO chance of being the president like 12 months ago and look where we are now.

Fair, fair...

But this is a tough sell for the more moderate wing of the party, particularly from poorer states. Of course, as we've just seen anything can and will happen in American politics.

 

[GK86]

Glad I won't have healthcare so a fucking dickwad can buy an extra yacht.

 

[Tranqueris]

So- I'm assuming this is now almost assuredly DOA in the Senate.

If it even makes it past the House.

I'll believe it when we see the final votes in the Senate. Until then I'll assume that these fucks fall in line like they did with Devos.

 

[VendettaRed07]

So- I'm assuming this is now almost assuredly DOA in the Senate.

If it even makes it past the House.

Who's going to vote against it ?

 

[KHarvey16]

If someone would prefer not to purchase healthcare, it is disingenuous to refer to "losing". "Dropping" would be more accurate.

I agree it's necessary to have healthy people on to subsidize the sick.

No, it's losing. The mechanism which caused them to buy insurance and pay premiums will be removed. When that happens they are lost from the rolls. There is nothing disingenuous or inaccurate about it. The mandate is a fundamental pillar and it's keeping people in. If the pillar goes away those who were in but now aren't were lost.

 

[guek]

I expect the GOP shills to parrot the deficit savings every time anyone brings up loss of coverage. "No, I wont answer your question, but look over here! More money for the military!"

 

[GK86]

Videos:

CNN‏ @CNN

Pelosi on GOP's health care plan: "I hope that they would pull the bill. It's really the only decent thing to do"


Sen. Chuck Schumer: “Trumpcare would be a nightmare for the American people” [url]http://cnn.it/2ngWFRl [/URL]

 

[slit]

Who's going to vote against it ?

All the Dems in the Senate and HOPEFULLY Rob Portman, Shelley Capito , Cory Gardner, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins who have said they were not behind it in its current form. If that happens, it's DOA in the Senate.

 

[erawsd]

I think the CBO gave republicans their out with this:

Most of that increase would stem from repealing the penalties associated with the individual mandate. Some of those people would choose not to have insurance because they chose to be covered by insurance under current law only to avoid paying the penalties, and some people would forgo insurance in response to higher premiums.

This mean Ryan and co will be able to frame an argument where "most" of those 14 million are people who choose not to have health care and were only on it to avoid fines, while the remainder are people who should buy less iPhones and take responsibility for their own health insurance instead of looking for government entitlements.

 

[pigeon]

For the majority of my life ACA was not a thing. I have been talking about a single payer system for nearly 20 years. Yet we are no closer today to making it a reality than we were 20 years ago.



Short answer is NO.

Long answer is that prior to ACA there were programs that paid for basic healthcare care but few people qualified and even fewer knew about them. Also it varied from state to state.

Wait, what? Yes it did. Medicaid has existed for decades, even before the ACA expanded it. It did vary from state to state, and still does.

 

[Kevinroc]

I'll believe it when we see the final votes in the Senate. Until then I'll assume that these fucks fall in line like they did with Devos.

Devos was basically a single news cycle.

This is millions of people losing their health insurance every year. Stories and stories of people losing their savings, losing everything they own, losing their very lives, because they didn't have health insurance.

(Of course I also have no faith in Republicans. So I'm under no illusions that this is guaranteed to fail.)

 

[Black Mamba]

I expect the GOP shills to parrot the deficit savings every time anyone brings up loss of coverage. "No, I wont answer your question, but look over here! More money for the military!"

https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/841407351089446913

Ben Casselman‏Verified account @bencasselman 2m2 minutes ago
More
Key context for the CBO's est. that AHCA would reduce deficit by $337 billion: Projected deficit is $8.6 TRILLION over same period.

Pennies in the jar.

 

[Maxim726X]

Who's going to vote against it ?

There are almost a dozen people who have gone on the record saying they won't vote for this *before* this got released...

How is a senator, from a poor state with a large Medicaid enrollment, going to justify voting for an insurance plan that takes away their medical coverage? They'll vote to save their ass every time... Which is different than approving cabinet picks.

 

[zelas]

These guys are off to a great start addressing the opioid epidemic. Dems need to tie this massive loss of coverage to that issue and get those whites votes back in line.

 

[KernelPanic]

AHCA? More like BOHICA

 

[Beer Monkey]

There was a time in my life where I said "no thanks" to health insurance because it added a little to my paycheck, and I had no interest. If I had millions of dollars I wouldn't have gotten it.

Oddly enough, nobody in Congress says "no thanks" to their health insurance (even pre-ACA), despite them having a payroll deduction for their portion.

 

[David H Wong]

Who's going to vote against it ?

Enough members of congress have come out against it already to ensure it doesn't pass. These guys don't want to get slaughtered in the midterms.

 

[mnannola]

This is going to make it really tough for the even the house to pass this bill. If the GOP thinks the town halls now are nasty...

 

[RustyNails]

Looks like Trumpcare is going to die a lonely death alongside Hillarycare

 

[guek]

https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/841407351089446913




Pennies in the jar.

A fact I'm sure they'll gleefully omit

 

[PandaPandaPanda]

https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/841407351089446913




Pennies in the jar.

If we're going to axe something, take a look at how much we spend on military spending. That'll never happen though.

 

[Black Mamba]

If we're going to axe something, take a look at how much we spend on military spending. That'll never happen though.

Trump has. And his new budget expands military spending by more than the AHCA reduces deficits!

 

[Killthee]

 

[darkistheway]

You guys aren't seeing the big picture. Sure 24 million people end up uninsured, sure $337 billion over ten years is just a drop in the bucket. But think about this: clean coal! the Wall! drain the swamp! make America great again! White power!

You will be tired of winning.

/s

 

[Felix Lighter]

The GOP fucking over one of their most loyal demographics, older voters. I can only hope the fear of being left to die without affordable health coverage is something they care more about than bigotry.

 

[Karsticles]

I didn't tell you to fuck off. I said "fuck this," as in "It seems to me that if 14 million people didn't want it before, and will drop it after ACHA, it's a bit disingenuous to frame the situation as people "losing" their insurance." And poor people.

Fuck this! This whole premise. Fuck it! Because it's not correct! So I showed why.

"3 million from the mandate." No. In fact, I'd argue zero. Or close to it. Because almost all the people in the marketplaces dropping insurance are going to be older people who can no longer afford it which you agree is the same as losing it.

The funny thing about the AHCA is that there will be a higher percentage of healthy, younger people in the pool than under the ACA with the mandate. Of course, that was the case pre-ACA too.

So while the marketplaces will drop in amount of people covered, it will also SHIFT who is covered. And the people dropping insurance will almost entirely not be from the mandate because the mandate fine is too small. but almost exclusively from middle aged and almost elderly people who can no longer afford it.

I still don't see the need to be so disrespectful. My sentence had an "if" because it was demonstrating a hypothetical - it wasn't an opinion I was pushing.

No, it's losing. The mechanism which caused them to buy insurance and pay premiums will be removed. When that happens they are lost from the rolls. There is nothing disingenuous or inaccurate about it. The mandate is a fundamental pillar and it's keeping people in. If the pillar goes away those who were in but now aren't were lost.

I think it's losing if people wanted it and can't keep it, and that seems to be most of the cases.

Oddly enough, nobody in Congress says "no thanks" to their health insurance (even pre-ACA), despite them having a payroll deduction for their portion.

Legislators have it good - they should share.

 

[WedgeX]

Glad I won't have healthcare so a fucking dickwad can buy an extra yacht.

We should probably start calling this bill the Luxury Yacht Industry Stimulus Act.

 

[BeforeU]

No wonder trump didnt wanted his name on it

 

[Volimar]

After CBO Score, Republican leaders show no signs of shifting course

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/13/politics/cbo-score-republican-reaction/index.html

 

[toddhunter]

The GOP fucking over one of their most loyal demographics, older voters. I can only hope the fear of being left to die without affordable health coverage is something they care more about than bigotry.

But if they don't vote Republican they are not supporting their church and will go to hell. Not that their church believes in hell of course, but they don't really point that out.

You can see how these people really have it tough.

 

[Hooligan69]

Colorado single payer vote was a pretty resounding no. Also, I don't live in any of those states. The discussion at Fed level is almost non existent.

Colorado did reject single payer, but only because the negative ads and articles and FUD outnumbered the facts and promotion of it by 90-1.

Once the horror of Republicare/Trumpcare/Ryancare hits, maybe it'll look better in a few years and we can try again.