Reply With Quote
They are being a bit mean, IMO. Don't let them get to you.
You're still wrong though.
How Obamacare is beginning to look a lot like Medicaid
The irony of new Obamacare developments
In a great irony, the Republicans, who promised to eliminate the Affordable Care Act and roll back Medicaid expansions, are in essence about to do the reverse – at a huge cost to the U.S. Treasury.
This year Obamacare will become what could be seen as an expanded version of Medicaid.
An ineffectual Congress unable to pass even minimal corrective legislation and bullying actions from the White House have produced an enormous increase in nominal premiums of at least 34 percent for 2018 plans offered on the individual exchanges.
The increases came about as plans scrambled to cover the higher risk of expensive care. Meanwhile, large group premiums continue to grow at a little over 6 percent.
But not all marketplace consumers will pay for those increases – taxpayers will.
The average subsidy for Obamacare consumers will grow by 45 percent, making the net premium costs even lower for many!
Subsidies are determined by taking the difference between stated premiums and a fixed percent of an enrollee’s income (2 percent for those just above the poverty level; up to 9.5 percent for at the top).
Originally, sliding-scale subsidies based on income were to make access affordable for everyone.
But sky-high premiums mean that only those qualifying for these subsidies are likely to purchase insurance on the exchanges, while others are priced out.
So Obamacare becomes an extended Medicaid expansion
This latest scenario looks a lot like the Republican plans for Medicaid under the waivers, as enacted by Indiana and planned widely in red states.
Effectively, many of the same people rotate between conventional Medicaid and the Obamacare insurance exchange.
Thanks to the subsidies under the ACA, these folks will not suffer the 34 percent increase in premiums and will stay with exchange plans. Since subsidies are rising, many of them may pay far less, or even zero premiums.
As over three-quarters of those on the exchange receive substantial subsidies,
the enrollment on the exchanges will not drop precipitously although government outlays will jump.
So the bottom line is that most folks left in Obamacare will be those still receiving significant subsidies.
These are the people who look a lot like conventional Medicaid enrollees – because they were enrolled before or are on the edge of eligibility now.
Effectively, we have expanded the Medicaid program to them through the back door.
Does anyone win?
The only winners here may be those low-income people who now have higher subsidies and a lower net cost of insurance.
Virtually no one else comes out ahead –
not insurers,
not other individuals,
not the government.https://www.salon.com/2017/11/02/how...like-medicaid/
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated"
They are being a bit mean, IMO. Don't let them get to you.
You're still wrong though.
IF the consequences weren't so impactful to people, it would be funny to watch the GOP scramble to patch their self-inflicted wound.How Obamacare is beginning to look a lot like Medicaid
The irony of new Obamacare developments
In a great irony, the Republicans, who promised to eliminate the Affordable Care Act and roll back Medicaid expansions, are in essence about to do the reverse – at a huge cost to the U.S. Treasury.
This year Obamacare will become what could be seen as an expanded version of Medicaid.
An ineffectual Congress unable to pass even minimal corrective legislation and bullying actions from the White House have produced an enormous increase in nominal premiums of at least 34 percent for 2018 plans offered on the individual exchanges.
The increases came about as plans scrambled to cover the higher risk of expensive care. Meanwhile, large group premiums continue to grow at a little over 6 percent.
But not all marketplace consumers will pay for those increases – taxpayers will.
The average subsidy for Obamacare consumers will grow by 45 percent, making the net premium costs even lower for many!
Subsidies are determined by taking the difference between stated premiums and a fixed percent of an enrollee’s income (2 percent for those just above the poverty level; up to 9.5 percent for at the top).
Originally, sliding-scale subsidies based on income were to make access affordable for everyone.
But sky-high premiums mean that only those qualifying for these subsidies are likely to purchase insurance on the exchanges, while others are priced out.
So Obamacare becomes an extended Medicaid expansion
This latest scenario looks a lot like the Republican plans for Medicaid under the waivers, as enacted by Indiana and planned widely in red states.
Effectively, many of the same people rotate between conventional Medicaid and the Obamacare insurance exchange.
Thanks to the subsidies under the ACA, these folks will not suffer the 34 percent increase in premiums and will stay with exchange plans. Since subsidies are rising, many of them may pay far less, or even zero premiums.
As over three-quarters of those on the exchange receive substantial subsidies,
the enrollment on the exchanges will not drop precipitously although government outlays will jump.
So the bottom line is that most folks left in Obamacare will be those still receiving significant subsidies.
These are the people who look a lot like conventional Medicaid enrollees – because they were enrolled before or are on the edge of eligibility now.
Effectively, we have expanded the Medicaid program to them through the back door.
Does anyone win?
The only winners here may be those low-income people who now have higher subsidies and a lower net cost of insurance.
Virtually no one else comes out ahead –
not insurers,
not other individuals,
not the government.https://www.salon.com/2017/11/02/how...like-medicaid/
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated"
Unelected judges pursuing an activist agenda, overturning duly enacted law and the will of the people
(blued)
Once upon a time, half the board would be in here tap dancing around the ACA's open grave.
RIP policy discussions on ST.
red states that didn't expand medicaid have a higher mortality rate among poor people than (blue) states that did.
iow, oligarchy/Repug policies KILL PEOPLE for profit.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
