Costliest 1 Percent Of Patients Account For 21 Percent Of U.S. Health Spending

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,831
Reputation
4,929
Daps
69,137
I'm 26....no children, no family, didn't really use doctors visits even when I had my parents insurance.....I'm going to have massive students loans next year and even with the alternative payback plans that shyt is still going to put a hurting in my pocket. From what I understand, Obamacare doesn't take student loan debt into account.


Your boy probably could have gone another decade without spending a cent on healthcare. I'm really feeling iffy about that individual mandate right about now....:patrice:

No question, and we are loser in this (the youth). It's a form of distributive justice and we take the net loss. Also, the PPACA will probably only
effect somewhere between 10 to at most 15% of the population on a significant level. Older individuals not yet at the medicaid age will benefit by getting coverage cheaper than in the private market, those with preexisting conditions will benefit, many women will benefit (it's against gender rating), and those who are able to stay on their parent's plan for a longer period of time will benefit, as will many of the poor who will be subsidized and have their contribution capped. I don't mind if I take the economic hit for an overall healthier society (which will shift to something better in the future), but you're right. No matter how you flip it, we lose from a financial standpoint. But I also wouldn't mind if they were taxing me to provide healthcare for society as a whole :manny:

On the flip side, hopefully some of the devices in the act will cause individuals to fall back on expensive treatments that have not been shown to lead to better results, just more costs. There's a strong argument that is the actual reason costs are so high. But you have every right to feel some type of way. ESPECIALLY because older adults don't exactly seem to give a fukk about our student loan crisis.
 

Yapdatfool

Superstar
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
8,442
Reputation
1,134
Daps
22,161
Reppin
NULL
No question, and we are loser in this (the youth). It's a form of distributive justice and we take the net loss. Also, the PPACA will probably only
effect somewhere between 10 to at most 15% of the population on a significant level. Older individuals not yet at the medicaid age will benefit by getting coverage cheaper than in the private market, those with preexisting conditions will benefit, many women will benefit (it's against gender rating), and those who are able to stay on their parent's plan for a longer period of time will benefit, as will many of the poor who will be subsidized and have their contribution capped. I don't mind if I take the economic hit for an overall healthier society (which will shift to something better in the future), but you're right. No matter how you flip it, we lose from a financial standpoint. But I also wouldn't mind if they were taxing me to provide healthcare for society as a whole :manny:

On the flip side, hopefully some of the devices in the act will cause individuals to fall back on expensive treatments that have not been shown to lead to better results, just more costs. There's a strong argument that is the actual reason costs are so high. But you have every right to feel some type of way. ESPECIALLY because older adults don't exactly seem to give a fukk about our student loan crisis.

I tend to find them to not give a fukk about anything but themselves in every decision they make, Especially health-care.
 

Box Cutta

Bumbling Sidekick
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
16,784
Reputation
2,359
Daps
39,491
Reppin
Sanitation Department
No question, and we are loser in this (the youth). It's a form of distributive justice and we take the net loss. Also, the PPACA will probably only
effect somewhere between 10 to at most 15% of the population on a significant level. Older individuals not yet at the medicaid age will benefit by getting coverage cheaper than in the private market, those with preexisting conditions will benefit, many women will benefit (it's against gender rating), and those who are able to stay on their parent's plan for a longer period of time will benefit, as will many of the poor who will be subsidized and have their contribution capped. I don't mind if I take the economic hit for an overall healthier society (which will shift to something better in the future), but you're right. No matter how you flip it, we lose from a financial standpoint. But I also wouldn't mind if they were taxing me to provide healthcare for society as a whole :manny:

On the flip side, hopefully some of the devices in the act will cause individuals to fall back on expensive treatments that have not been shown to lead to better results, just more costs. There's a strong argument that is the actual reason costs are so high. But you have every right to feel some type of way. ESPECIALLY because older adults don't exactly seem to give a fukk about our student loan crisis.

I'm not a fukking tea partier, but I do *get* why some hate Obamacare so much. This shyt has forced *everyone* to have to account for healthcare *forever*. It's...not how things should have gone.

I really hope it leads to socialized medicine some day. The wealthy should contribute more towards the plan through taxes.

I tend to find them to not give a fukk about anything but themselves in every decision they make, Especially health-care.

Baby Boomers are just fukking relentless. If you're black, America has never really been good...but these old folks hanging on right now just seem determined to take all of us down.
 
Top