What do you expect from a scam where 20%+ of your annual premium is skimmed-off to insurance company overhead and excessive Executive Compensation? Meanwhile, traditional Medicare only spends about 1.5% of the program budget on admin costs, the other 98.5% goes to pay for actual medical services.
Only in America do we have a large number of innumerate people who believe that adding a private insurance company’s overhead & profit to a doctor or hospital bill is going to make health care cheaper. It defies arithmetic.
Some people prefer a country where 30k mostly women die with little to no insurance as the reason. The excuse is the sick sick call for a tax cut. The gullible lineup for the tax cut that never comes. Meanwhile, we offshored their jobs and gave tax cuts to the people who went to produce in China. Lovely. Why not kill people out right? Self-centered tax cuts to kill.
The little man’s, “I earned this money. I should not be paying taxes”.
From my perspective, it works pretty well for those who make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but can’t afford health insurance at full price. It’s the subsidy - which you are well aware of - that is the major success and makes the insurance affordable.
And the insurance companies cry a river about being cut to only a 20% skim. I remember hearing a comment, when the ACA was being debated, that some insurance companies in Florida were skimming something like 40% or 60%.
The health plans that colleges required students to get were the worst. Some only spent 5% of premiums collected on actual medical care. The rest went to overhead & profit, and I suppose a big kickback to the university that sponsored the scam.
The first thing that happened to the ACA the major medical subsidies to the insurers for catastrophes were taken away as excess spending. The ACA then became poorer private insurance coverage organized by the states but only in the selection process.
It’s all about fear of socialism, fear of Big Gubmint. That’s it. Even if it costs them more money. And, for reasons I cannot understand, some simply do not believe health insurance is something they need. I’m related by marriage to too many people like this. Many of whom are unhealthy and in serious debt to hospitals.
It is a minority of people against universal care.
The issue was during the supply side period many people were not invested in caring about our economy. The economy was not for them in any way. It was against them.
The demand side periods see a 10% higher voter turnout in the general elections. People become invested in our country. The ACA was early in a very hopeful process but it fell flat because Obama was too young to navigate the Senate. Biden at times shows too weak a hand by negotiating/compromising when he should not be.
The public does not like that weakness and takes it as reneging.
The industrialists could not rush the process because the Chinese were still rising. We were offshoring factories. We did not have the growing wealth to go to a universal system.
As central Europe turns to supply side econ there is growing talk of cutting healthcare benefits among other things. The wealthy need the money Bull…blank…
Absolutely! Obamacare works best if you’re getting most of your income in unrealized capital gains where you control the timing of any taxation, and tax-free returns of capital (e.g., you could probably spend down some of your fixed income allocation without generating any taxable income, with interest rates up, it might even give you a small capital loss.) Also, BRK solves a lot of problems.
It’s understandable that some people are not happy with such a system. I’ve been a big supporter of the ACA, but I’m not convinced that it has helped my family much, so far at least. We pay a lot for pretty poor coverage, though the catastrophic coverage and guaranteed issue are a great comfort. The ACA has helped many others and I’m happy about that.
I’m all for single-payer. I’m from the UK and believe the NHS is a wonderful institution.
Y’all got to be careful what you wish for, though. Universal healthcare has to be paid for. In the UK they have 40%+ income tax rates, 20% VAT, gas at $7/gallon, 40% estate tax on fairly modest estates, etc. It’s worth it, IMHO.
Intercst would like it, mind you. A UK resident multi-millionaire can get free healthcare while paying little income tax. There is that pesky VAT though. And that 40% estate tax might be thought of as a burden, depending on what one thinks of inheritances.
My late father’s estate just paid a large sum to the UK government. Partial payment for the many years of care he received from the NHS.
But selfishness is what the mob has been indoctrinated with, for 40 years.
For “supply side” tax cuts “cut welfare, and give the money to the “JCs”, and maybe you will get a job”. During the current auto industry contract talks, the “business editor”, in particular, at one of the local stations, tools of management all, is rattling on “if the workers get a pay raise, it will make the car you want cost more”. Completely lost in that logic is the simple observation that Mexican auto workers only make about $100/week, but the vehicles built in Mexico are no cheaper than those built in the US, management simply pockets the difference in wages.
That narrative is still with us, in the form of “personal responsibility” but the evidence shows that “responsibility” is only for proles. When the “JCs” get in trouble, they go running to the government they hate for protection and handouts.