Debate: The ACA is a Republican plan through and through (TUH's Proof vs. BarNone's Proof))

[tru_m.a.c]

his plan WILL be put into effect. It completely eliminates the price controlling mechanism of non participation. if you HAVE to have insurance, insurers can essentially charge you any price they want or you will have to pay the government money on the other end of the equation. It's a bad news policy, but because people are so caught up in partisan politics, they will defend it. We hear about all of this competition that's supposed to lower prices, but what's stopping the competition from banding together and price fixing? The government? lol yeah alright.

again....

health insurance like insurance depends on the risk of a set population.....that is why the ACA requires all americans to buy insurance

again....

health insurers charge their consumers a premium. hospitals charge patients/insurers for the COST OF CARE. Hospitals are thus REIMBURSED.

but lets start like this...what state are you from?

 

[Raava]

The current ACA is not the same as what was originally proposed to what actually got passed in Congress.

 

[Type Username Here]

The current ACA is not the same as what was originally proposed to what actually got passed in Congress.

What do you mean? How is it relevant to this discussion?

 

[Type Username Here]

health insurers charge their consumers a premium. hospitals charge patients/insurers for the COST OF CARE. Hospitals are thus REIMBURSED.

My God, not this garbage again. I already have shown you earlier that there is documented proof that these prices are haggle and determined with input from insurance companies.

Do you work for these companies? Serious question.

 

[The Real]

People need to stop referring to the buy-in as a "mandate." It's not. That's clearly ideological language originating in the Republican backlash that obfuscates the structure of the plan. I'm not thrilled with the ACA, obviously, but fair is fair, and a mandate is by definition literally mandatory. It should be criticized based on what it actually does.

 

[Type Username Here]

People need to stop referring to the buy-in as a "mandate." It's not. That's clearly ideological language originating in the Republican backlash that obfuscates the structure of the plan. I'm not thrilled with the ACA, obviously, but fair is fair, and a mandate is by definition literally mandatory. It should be criticized based on what it actually does.

Is there not some form of retribution for refusing to buy a private product?

 

[tru_m.a.c]

My God, not this garbage again. I already have shown you earlier that there is documented proof that these prices are haggle and determined with input from insurance companies.

Do you work for these companies? Serious question.

YOU fukkN DUMB shyt

THE PRICES ARE HAGGLED BECAUSE UNITED, BLUE CROSS, AETNA ETC HAVE THE PROMISE OF A LARGE SET OF HEALTHCARE CONSUMERS.

THE HOSPITALS SET THE PRICE THRESHOLD. THE INSURERS COME IN AND BARGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE fukkN CONSUMERS. THAT IS WHY THERE IS NEVER A SET PRICE FOR WHAT YOU ARE CHARGED.

GOD DAMN.

 

[The Real]

Is there not some form of retribution for refusing to buy a private product?

I wouldn't call it retribution, but yes, there is a negative effect, though there are also several exceptions.

 

[Type Username Here]

YOU fukkN DUMB shyt

THE PRICES ARE HAGGLED BECAUSE UNITED, BLUE CROSS, AETNA ETC HAVE THE PROMISE OF A LARGE SET OF HEALTHCARE CONSUMERS.

THE HOSPITALS SET THE PRICE THRESHOLD. THE INSURERS COME IN AND BARGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE fukkN CONSUMERS. THAT IS WHY THERE IS NEVER A SET PRICE FOR WHAT YOU ARE CHARGED.

GOD DAMN.

Again, let me provide some proof to counter your emotional, hormonal outburst:

1) Complete audit of 350 California hospitals showing documentation of input in determining prices:
http://truecostofhealthcare.org/hospital_financial_analysis

2) Hear it from a doctor:


3) Here is the case where a doctor refused to accept health insurance and his costs went down:
Doctor stops accepting insurance, lowers prices and posts costs online
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sidesho...ance-lowers-prices-posts-costs-194405203.html


Anytime you want to turn down the estrogen outburst and engage with some facts I will be ready.

Also, do you ever understand the logic in your argument. If the problem with high costs is all on the hospitals who do the pricing, can you name me the parts in the ACA that set pricing limits on these hospitals?

I'll wait.

 

[Type Username Here]

I wouldn't call it retribution, but yes, there is a negative effect, though there are also several exceptions.

Just to give you the heads up, the actual act contains the word mandate relative to what you were addressing. I can provide you with the excerpt if you desire. Let me know.

 

[The Real]

Just to give you the heads up, the actual act contains the word mandate relative to what you were addressing. I can provide you with the excerpt if you desire. Let me know.

If so, that's unfortunate for its creators, and I have to admit I'm surprised, since it seems like they're shooting themselves in the foot with that language. Maybe a sign of who is controlling the language, since even "Obamacare" started out as a slur.

 

[TheReal_Broke_88m3_13]

This post and this entire thread is one of the few times I've ever posted on this board where I'm literally offending by people's ignorance that they believe to be proper understanding.

 

[Raava]

What do you mean? How is it relevant to this discussion?

I misread.

 

[DEAD7]

Again, let me provide some proof to counter your emotional, hormonal outburst:

 

[Blackking]

lol.... yall are full of shyt about the 'mandate'.. it really is a mandate due to penalties.