CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Healthcare/ACA 2017
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Healthcare/ACA 2017 - Page 4

post #151 of 168

Let us dispel the myth that the Medicaid expansion only insures able-bodied people who don't want to work:

 

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/03/06/myths-about-the-medicaid-expansion-and-the-able-bodied/

 

Quote:

A conservative critique of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) expansion of Medicaid eligibility is that it helps adults who are “able-bodied” and may discourage them from working. For example, a policy summary released by House Republicans proposes that “Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion for able-bodied adults [should] be repealed in its current form” (emphasis added). Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson has declared that if people are not willing to work and are “able-bodied, they ought to be kicked off the system.” In fact, the great majority of adults covered by the Medicaid expansion are in ill health or are already working, in school, or looking for work.

 

This false understanding of Medicaid recipients and their health insurance options has already influenced policymaking at the state level. For example, Arizona plans to seek a Medicaid waiver to limit able-bodied adults to a maximum of five years lifetime coverage and impose work requirements during that period. Similar waiver proposals have been consistently rejected in the past because they are contrary to the statutory objectives of Medicaid, which has never imposed lifetime limits or work requirements. But there is a risk that such a waiver might be approved in today’s policy environment.

 

These policy ideas stem from a serious misunderstanding about Medicaid recipients and a flawed belief that employment effectively assures health insurance coverage. In reality, only a small share of the adults covered by Medicaid expansions are in good health but not working, in school, or looking for work. Moreover, the types of low-wage jobs available to Medicaid enrollees are unlikely to offer meaningful health insurance coverage.

 

Data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey illustrate that most healthy Medicaid expansion beneficiaries are working or pursuing economic opportunities. Half (48 percent) of adults covered by the Medicaid expansion are permanently disabled, have serious physical or mental limitations—-caused by conditions like cancer, stroke, heart disease, cognitive or mental health disorders, arthritis, pregnancy, or diabetes—-or are in fair or poor health. Low-wage jobs are often physically demanding, precluding those with limitations from employment. Of the other half, who might be viewed as “able-bodied,” 62 percent are already working or in school and 12 percent are looking for work; only 25 percent are not currently working or in school. (More information about the analyses is at the end of this brief.)

 

Only 13 percent of adults covered by Medicaid’s expansion are able-bodied and not working, in school, or seeking work. Of that small group, three-quarters report they are not working in order to care for family members and the rest report other reasons, like being laid off. A much higher share of overall American adults are unemployed or not in the labor force (28 percent), according to 2015 Census data. Medicaid expansion enrollees are more likely to be working or looking for work than the general public, unless they are burdened by ill health or the needs of their families. Moreover, Medicaid expansions could make it easier for beneficiaries to find work, as reported in Ohio.

post #152 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farsight View Post
 

Heh, yeah, because if you offer people free access to MedicAid, they're going to refuse it. You'd have throw them in jail! Or just execute them! We can't execute everyone! So universal health care is unpossible!

 

Of course, he's not even considering the possibility of health care without insurance companies lining his pockets.

 

These guys' inability to form a single logical argument is baffling.

 

You scoff, but literally every country that has universal health care does it by filling their jails with freedom fighters who won't take free health insurance.

 

 

 

...right?

post #153 of 168
Thread Starter 

Such

monumental

ASSHOLES

 

 

House Republicans May Have Saved Trumpcare by Making It Even Crueler
Quote:

The proposal is to eliminate ten essential benefits that, according to the Affordable Care Act, must be offered as part of any insurance plan. Those benefits are:

 

• Outpatient care without a hospital admission, known as ambulatory patient services

• Emergency services

• Hospitalization

• Pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care

• Mental health and substance use disorder services, including counseling and psychotherapy

• Prescription drugs

• Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, which help people with injuries and disabilities to recover

• Laboratory services

• Preventive care, wellness services, and chronic disease management

• Pediatric services, including oral and vision care for children

 

I'm gobsmacked that these mf-ers can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning.

post #154 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post
 

Such

monumental

ASSHOLES

 

 

House Republicans May Have Saved Trumpcare by Making It Even Crueler
Quote:

 

I'm gobsmacked that these mf-ers can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning.

Of course they can! A mirror only shows them the people they really care about.*

 

*It vexes me that most republicans are descendents of inmigrants that were the mexicans, muslims and the like of their day in the opinion of the "real americans" of the time.

post #155 of 168

God, so much chaos in the House just because Paul Ryan got his first boner while reading Atlas Shrugged.

post #156 of 168

Maybe with enough of this people will educate themselves on the state of the world and single payer will start mustering real support.  

post #157 of 168

The vote's reportedly been delayed, possibly to tomorrow.


EDIT: Yup, delayed. This is gloriously pathetic. They can't muster the votes. Everyone needs to find Ryan and laugh derisively at him, right at his stupid smug Rand-loving face.


Edited by Dent6084 - Yesterday at 12:48 pm
post #158 of 168
Are they going to pull another all-nighter and fuck with it even more?

"What if we just deported people with preexisting conditions? Yeah!"
post #159 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Are they going to pull another all-nighter and fuck with it even more?

"What if we just deported people with preexisting conditions? Yeah!"

 

Bradito, you have to realize that the 1-10% of the population with pre-existing conditions or who are ill consume something like 99% of all healthcare costs.  If we want to give health insurance at a reasonable cost to the middle class we have to find a way to ensure that people who are sick aren't able to obtain coverage, cause including them does nothing but drive up the cost for everyone.  Those "people" aren't much fun to be around anyway, so society doesn't even benefit from them being alive.  

post #160 of 168
Yeah, fuck 'em!

Am I doing this right?
post #161 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Yeah, fuck 'em!

Am I doing this right?

 

You need to be more word-smith-y and circumspect in your language choices in order to conceal your true meaning.  

post #162 of 168
You're the lawyer.
post #163 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

You're the lawyer.

Part time.  

post #164 of 168
Quote:

The proposal is to eliminate ten essential benefits that, according to the Affordable Care Act, must be offered as part of any insurance plan. Those benefits are:

 

• Outpatient care without a hospital admission, known as ambulatory patient services

• Emergency services

• Hospitalization

• Pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care

• Mental health and substance use disorder services, including counseling and psychotherapy

• Prescription drugs

• Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, which help people with injuries and disabilities to recover

• Laboratory services

• Preventive care, wellness services, and chronic disease management

• Pediatric services, including oral and vision care for children

 

Seriously, at that point, isn't all what's left a "Give us your money and get ​nothing​ in return" plan? You'd get better value setting your money on fire for warmth by the looks of that.

post #165 of 168

No, it provides a piece of string and a lump of burning coal as dental coverage.

 

I cannot fathom people who would write that into legislation and claim with a straight face that they represent your best interest, and that this constitutes effective health insurance.  If something like that is ever passed, invest in manufacturers of pitchforks.  I swear, Republicans are another race.

post #166 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
 

No, it provides a piece of string and a lump of burning coal as dental coverage.

 

I cannot fathom people who would write that into legislation and claim with a straight face that they represent your best interest, and that this constitutes effective health insurance.  If something like that is ever passed, invest in manufacturers of pitchforks.  I swear, Republicans are another race.

 

What's the deductible on that?

 

I've only recently learnt approximately what that means in the context on healthcare in the US and I'm not sure there's many if any worlds I hate more.

 

Oh, wait. Thought of one.

 

"Pre-existing condition."

post #167 of 168

Especially when they count having acne as a teenager or having tubes in the ears as a kid as 'pre-existing conditions'.

 

I've only had a run-in with American insurance woes once.  My job offered a pretty weak SunLife plan as benefits, and I was trying to file a claim for a $90 massage.  They would only pay $85.  I was sure to phone them to ask why they were stiffing me five dollars, and I was not shy about telling the nice lady that my plan was to keep her on the phone long enough such that paying her to talk to me cost them more than that.  She was entirely cool with the idea and we had a lovely chat, both agreeing that it was really in SunLife's best interest to just pay me and move on.

post #168 of 168
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
 

Especially when they count having acne as a teenager or having tubes in the ears as a kid as 'pre-existing conditions'.

 

I've only had a run-in with American insurance woes once.  My job offered a pretty weak SunLife plan as benefits, and I was trying to file a claim for a $90 massage.  They would only pay $85.  I was sure to phone them to ask why they were stiffing me five dollars, and I was not shy about telling the nice lady that my plan was to keep her on the phone long enough such that paying her to talk to me cost them more than that.  She was entirely cool with the idea and we had a lovely chat, both agreeing that it was really in SunLife's best interest to just pay me and move on.

 

brilliant <applause>

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Healthcare/ACA 2017