Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 07:46 AM Nov 2016

Heard something interesting about Obamacare on NPR yesterday...

They said that nearly half of people with health insurance get it through their jobs, and that for THOSE people, premiums are up by just about 4% this year. That's down from average of 7% before Obamacare.

They talked about why that is, and it is, you guessed it, because the risk pools are still too small and biased towards those that need care.

This is probably too "inside baseball" for HRC to use on the trail, but it is evidence that Obamacare CAN work, if we can get enough folks into the risk pool. A public option is really needed. Maybe a shared risk pool among all the participant companies. I know some folks want a single-payer system, but I have concerns about that.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Heard something interesting about Obamacare on NPR yesterday... (Original Post) Adrahil Nov 2016 OP
Over time, Obamacare will be very profitable for insurance co's after initial high payout period wishstar Nov 2016 #1
I supported it because it is better than what we had Cosmocat Nov 2016 #2
It was a step, but only a step. Adrahil Nov 2016 #3

wishstar

(5,269 posts)
1. Over time, Obamacare will be very profitable for insurance co's after initial high payout period
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 08:06 AM
Nov 2016

Has already been shown that those who signed up in 2014 and 2015 had gone years without medical care postponing needed expensive treatment and surgery until they had insurance, more than anticipated causing lower profits for insurance companies. But this should level out over time.

Just like when people first get dental insurance after years without dental care, they use their insurance for a lot of expensive procedures in the first two years until their usage levels off to preventative maintenance instead of costly repairs.

Cosmocat

(14,564 posts)
2. I supported it because it is better than what we had
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 08:15 AM
Nov 2016

but it WAS pretty much the republican model that was put forward when Bill and Hill tried to do reform, and what Romney did in Mass.

This country is just too fucking stupid to go to universal or single, and you had take what you can get.

And, it is better IF they make the right tweeks. But, what makes it not work is what the Rs and bought Ds want. And, this country is too fucking stupid to engage in the common sense approach of making adjustments to make it work.

It just is the never ending drone from the Rs, and their flock of brain dead zombies, to REPEAL AND REPLACE, with not even the first fucking thought as to what to replace with other than their wet dream bullshit of tort reform to keep people from having any capacity for recorse against malpractice and "health savings accounts."

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Heard something interesti...