Obamacare basics

[MichaelB]

MichaelB....here's a newstory that references a couple of instances of the President making such promises:

Health Premiums Up $3,065; Obama Vowed $2,500 Cut - Yahoo! Finance

Got it. Thanks. This was said during an election debate. Not really related to the PPACA.

 

[ziggy29]

While there may be exceptions, for most people:

1. Lack of dental care won't kill you.
2. The expense of dental care won't bankrupt you.
3. The cost of dental care is much less than the cost of medical care.

And in reality, dental "insurance" is the exact opposite of what insurance should be. It covers relatively small expenses, almost with the first dollar, up to a low limit at which time the insured owes 100% of "catastrophic" costs above the plan's maximum benefit. Actual insurance works the opposite way.

 

[FIRE'd@51]

I think it depends upon how you define "premium".

If you define premium as what the average family will pay in 2014 buying insurance in an exchange and include the subsidies, it could well be that the average family's "premium" will drop by $2,500 per year. I don't see how the premium without subsidy can drop by $2,500 per year when you take into account the extra required preventive care coverage, no lifetime caps, guaranteed-issue, etc

 

[MichaelB]

And in reality, dental "insurance" is the exact opposite of what insurance should be. It covers relatively small expenses, almost with the first dollar, up to a low limit at which time the insured owes 100% of "catastrophic" costs above the plan's maximum benefit. Actual insurance works the opposite way.

Exactly.

 

[bUU]

If I can't, I "hold them accountable" at re-election time - either in a primary or general election.

Then you get yourself into that death spiral I referred to earlier, because none of the Presidents in the past 50 years has significantly satisfied any promises they made to reduce the cost of health care. Again, you can choose not to value the objectives - that's another matter entirely, and if you do choose to devalue the objectives, a matter for which you'll find you're at odds with most Americans - but given these objectives, which recent President do you feel more significantly achieved their professed metrics toward those objectives?

And just to be clear, if you think that people should suffer inadequate health care as the consequence of preexisting conditions, lifetime caps, or the general impact of poverty, then just say that. It makes the situation clear, without having to dig through the misdirection of touting the inadequate progress being made toward those objectives for which you don't care about seeing progress made.

Regarding other bills, I may have used the wrong word (although I'd assume bills were introduced at the committee level - I don't recall specifically) - but there were other proposals (ex. tort reform, buying across state lines, etc.) made but not advanced.

Let's take tort reform off the table because no major party's nominated candidate for President seriously proposed it. The idea was paid lip service, for its sound bite value, nothing more. Only candidates who never had any significant chance of being elected focused on it. Personally, I'm all for it, but short of another civil war I recognize that there simply will be far too much opposition to it for it to get off the ground.

Buying insurance across state lines would trade off one objective at the expense of the others. You may personally prefer that trade-off, but that isn't what I asked you for: A proposal that adhered to the objectives that Obama outlined that Americans resonated with, which analysis indicated would have achieved those objectives (all of them, on average) better.

And I don't think that pre-testing is required - although, of course, it'd be nice. I assume you're referring to Romney-care in MA. I don't live there, but from what I've read average premiums have grown greatly since it's passage so I guess we shouldn't be surprised when it happens on a national level, too.

I do live here. Your information about the impact of Romenycare on our Commonweath is faulty. Health care premiums in Massachusetts were almost always the highest in the nation. Strange how certain evaluations of Massachusetts health care costs versus the rest of the nation seem to conveniently forget that. Quoting a friend of mine: "The benefits (i.e., what's covered and member cost sharing) offered by Massachusetts employers are significantly richer than the coverage offered by employers in the rest of the country. While there has been a shift to plans with upfront deductibles over the past few years, Massachusetts employers still offer health insurance to their employees that provides richer coverage (i.e., less member cost sharing) than employers in the rest of the country. I'm certainly not saying we don't have a health care cost problem, but premiums alone tell only part of the story."

And I agree - money isn't the only thing in life and that's not what I was saying.

Then it is incumbent on you to assess things using money as only one metric.

Hopefully you didn't mean your comment as self-righteous as it appears.

Not at all. Rather the intention was to make clear that any evaluation that assesses only the money side of the issue is incomplete.

 

[FIRE'd@51]

Got it. Thanks. This was said during an election debate. Not really related to the PPACA.

Actually, I remember him saying the same thing after he was elected during the runup to the actual passage of PPACA. And no, not being as facile as you with links, I can't provide one at the moment.

 

[bUU]

I tried to find such a statement, leading up to passage of the PPACA, and I couldn't. I did find the statement made during the campaign.

 

[Texas Proud]

Got it. Thanks. This was said during an election debate. Not really related to the PPACA.

I agree with this stmt... what Obama was running on to get elected and what he proposed for law were two completely different things...

He was talking (during the election) of reducing the total cost of health care... saving the nation billions of dollars if you restructured the health care system...

His proposal was universal health care.... at a cost of $1 trillion to the gvmt in the first decade... now, because of new taxes the net cost to the gvmt might be zero, but might not....


Most people wanted what he promised and not what was passed... don't get me wrong, I think a lot of what is in the law is good (even though I do not like the whole thing), but it was not what he had promised...

 

[Texas Proud]

And in reality, dental "insurance" is the exact opposite of what insurance should be. It covers relatively small expenses, almost with the first dollar, up to a low limit at which time the insured owes 100% of "catastrophic" costs above the plan's maximum benefit. Actual insurance works the opposite way.

I think that dental insurance has some of the things that is good.... IOW, if you can go to the dentist and get a cleaning for 'free', a lot of people actually do it... prevention in dental care is very important for overall dental health...

I do agree that there should be better coverage at the top....

 

[MichaelB]

[Mod hat on] I think everyone has had an opportunity to share what their expectation was regarding the PPACA. This is steadily slipping into the type of political discussion that we don’t want, so I suggest we leave that part as is and get back on topic, which is what the PPACA is. [Mod hat off]

 

[ziggy29]

I think that dental insurance has some of the things that is good.... IOW, if you can go to the dentist and get a cleaning for 'free', a lot of people actually do it... prevention in dental care is very important for overall dental health...

I do agree that there should be better coverage at the top....

I'm not saying dental coverage isn't a good thing, at least if it's employer-subsidized, I'm just being pedantic and saying it's silly that we call it "insurance" when it's pretty much the antithesis of the insurance model.

 

[Texas Proud]

I'm not saying dental coverage isn't a good thing, at least if it's employer-subsidized, I'm just being pedantic and saying it's silly that we call it "insurance" when it's pretty much the antithesis of the insurance model.

Yes... I agree....

 

[bUU]

I remember reading something recently which mentioned, as one of a remarkably (to me) small set of keys to a comfortable retirement "wear a night guard every night". What I find interesting is that that one rather important aspect of dental care is not only not covered by health insurance typically, but isn't even covered by most dental insurance. (My current night guard cost $800!)

 

[travelover]

I think I hear a pig trotting...........

Again..

 

[youbet]

I remember reading something recently which mentioned, as one of a remarkably (to me) small set of keys to a comfortable retirement "wear a night guard every night". What I find interesting is that that one rather important aspect of dental care is not only not covered by health insurance typically, but isn't even covered by most dental insurance. (My current night guard cost $800!)

It is appropriate that you paid the price of the applicance yourself. Now, enjoy it!

 

[bUU]

Appropriate? Perhaps, though since the insurance we're paying for promotes itself on the purchasing power it offers, negotiating discounts with providers, some price break might have been expected. However, that's not really the point I was making.

 

[FIRE'd@51]

I tried to find such a statement, leading up to passage of the PPACA, and I couldn't. I did find the statement made during the campaign.

Many of you who followed the healthcare debate probably watched the Blair House summit in Febraury, 2010. Beginning at the 3 minute point of this video, President Obama forcefully argues that passage of the PPACA will lower premiums in the individual market (for the same coverage) by 14-20 percent. Although, he doesn't specifically use the $2,500 number, that number can fall within his range.

Bipartisan Meeting on Health Reform: Part 2 - YouTube

 

[Alan]

Thanks folks, we think the questions posed in the OP have been answered and this thread has now run its course.