Getting rid of ACA individual mandate.

I want GS's opinion.

I think we need to stop playing games and implement a true UHS.

But that's just me.

The Mandate is just silly, and in my eyes what ruins the ACA. The general idea is that The Mandate pays for all the good stuff in the ACA that we just couldn't afford without it. It however does this by forcing poor people to pay for low monthly payment high deductible health insurance they can't actually afford to use. On top of this if they get so sick they have to go to the Hospital, chances are they are going to end up in debt they just will not be able to pay, even though they have 'health insurance.'

If you plan depends upon poor people paying corporations for products they can't afford to use, you have a bad plan. The idea that The Mandate is classified as progressive liberal thinking is just sad.

From what I briefly read about the individual mandate. It seems to be one of the main issues Americans had with the ACA. Having tax penalties for not being able to afford health insurance, turned out to be quite silly.

It's cheaper to not work at all than to work and pay the tax premium when you don't have health insurance. It really is an incentive to not work and get on welfare.

Thousands are going to die with this pussy footing by the left and regression to the hmo racket by the right.

totally agree

true, but what about if we do nothing? Or is the pussyfooting you are refering to the stuff that's going on right now? In that case, I agree.

One "team" should focus on fixing whats wrong with the current system, while another "team" comes up with a true UHS.

No more games, no more bullshit.

I think Trump should come out clean and show his true liberal side.

I'm sure the RINO's will be one his side.

The democrats have not done action 1 towards evolving the ACA, instead, defending even the worse portions of it against the GOP, even when they agree on the majority of issues within the law. The Republicans want us to revert back to the insurance, hmo provider racket that ironically, Hilary Clinton is responsible more than any other official for. I am hoping some shadowy group like Blackwater, or whatever their current name is, to kidnap the entire house and senate, and force them to hammer their differences out before they so much as piss and eat again. But that is about as realistic as the ghost of a unicorn shitting out legislation.....

I think this will hurt Obamacare. You can't have a health insurance system where you exclude prior conditions but don't require people to have insurance. No one will buy it until they get sick. I agree with excluding prior conditions so by default I understand and agree with the individual mandate. Health insurance is about the healthy subsidizing the sick. Everyone has to pay in to make it work.

Single payer is a whole different argument and system.

@hillelslovak: omg that would be awesome

the blackwater thing

also unicorn ghosts.

Well, yeah, but mostly just poor people.

[Edit: In case the sarcasm of the above line isn't evident... it is sarcasm...]

Unless an epidemic breaks out. Then we'll have a bunch of untreated Typhoid Mary's out there.

Red states are the states where drug abuse is rampant, so a real solution is what they need. Red states, who use the ACA, voted Republicans into office to get rid of their own healthcare. I do not get consistently voting against your own interest.

You should see Taiwan. But at least they get paid to do that.

One of my good friends is a small business owner with a fertility related pre-existing condition (the combination of which prevented her from getting insurance prior to the ACA). She voted for Trump, and to this day she does not believe she is benefiting from "Obamacare" despite getting insurance through the ACA exchanges.

For some reason people literally do not realize that they rely on these programs/laws.

I was just talking about that today with someone. The only reason has to be they aren't educated in what they are voting for........which is sad.

Propaganda and the bombardment over decades of the same message fools people.

The individual mandate is a problem, but only because it highlights the main item that made medical care so expensive in the U.S. and which continues to be why the system is failing: Insurance costs.

Pretty much, it doesn't matter what we do. As long as insurance agencies exist on health, it will fail to help most people. So, if we are to have any real solution at all, we have to do away with them.

And I don't think a UHS is the answer. Imagine if we had one right now, with the Republicans getting into office as they are. We all know the UHS would be at the top of their list of things to get spending cuts.

How about we get rid of the artificial, government enforced mandate, and replace it with a real world mandate.

Repeal the laws that force medical professionals and medical facilities to provide care to anyone that walks in, regardless of their ability to pay. Now that would create a real mandate. If you know you cannot count on the government to coerce your fellow citizens to provide you with a service for which you cannot pay, then you have a real world, enforced by reality, inescapable mandate to take steps to insure yourself.

I know this will never happen. And I realize that even suggesting it makes me a nasty, selfish, heartless............deplorable human being.

Just thought I'd throw it out there because it is an option, if we choose to go with it.

I hope to hell it never happens. Refusing medical care to anyone is horrible. And by the way....it's life saving medical care they have to provide. Wow....just wow. Republicans. smh

Up until September of this year I was uninsured for around 11 years. In theory I was a person who Obamacare was made for, I was working full time but my jobs health insurance plan was not affordable(insurance at my job cost about 325 per month). When ACA was enacted I welcomed it with open arms until I actually tried to sign up.

The reality is that the ACA was too expensive for me based on my income bracket, and even if I did pay for it, the plan was absolute shit with a huge deductible that would have negated the point of having health care in the first place. To make it worse, the presence of the ACA made my healthcare costs at my job skyrocket, what used to be about 325 a month jumped to 776 a month, which made any aspirations I had about obtaining health care completely moot.

Perhaps your friend is actually not voting against something that she "literally relies on" but instead did the research, wanted to sign up, and then realized how worthless the plan was and voted for Trump in the hopes that he would fix something that is clearly broken.

Might just aswell have medical personnel go " Oh you're sick and can't afford care? Well then use your second amendment right to end your suffering" as soon as someone in need visits.

Are you in a state that expanded Medicaid? One of Obamacare's provisions that I don't see many people talk about is the Medicaid expansion that helped A LOT of people who can't afford a plan under Obamacare.

I would have to visit the doctor twice a week every week just to meet the $6000 deductible of the cheapest plan before it would even begin to cover anything. I do not get that sick. I would spend $8400 over the course of a year just to save $90 for an office visit whereas paying out of pocket is only $60.

Or visit the emergency room once.

A specialist four or five times.

Didnt you say you had a family of like four or five?

I would spend $8400 over the course of a year just to save $90 for an office visit whereas paying out of pocket is only $60.

No, you spend 8400 in a year because if you go to the doctor and a tumor pops up, youll know you wont go broke attempting to remove it and if you find out its cancerous, you can be assured you have options.... what exactly do you think youre doing at the doctors? Do you think youre just going there to give them money and then nothing? You do understand that they could very easily find something, and chances are one of these days they will, and in the system youre wanting back, you'd most likely go broke attempting to deal with it.

See, you are trying to attribute to me something I never said. I have had issues where something arose and still paid cash for it. $100 is better than thousands for just a visit that isn't covered. Who says that I haven't seen a specialist?

Thanks for your reply.

First, I'm more inclined toward Libertarianism than I am toward the tenants of the Republican party.

To be clear, I am not advocating a new law that forbids providing health care free of charge, should individuals or organizations choose to do so of their own free will.

Do you disagree with my point that life creates its own mandates: a mandate to find shelter, food, clothing, health care, etc etc. And that allowing those real life mandates to take effect is less complicated than trying to replace them with government mandates?

Perhaps we might all be surprised at how good humanity really is. Faced with the real need to provide for one's self, I believe the vast majority of people will find it within themselves to meet that challenge. Absent government coercion, I believe those more capable in our society will, of their own free will, find ways to help those less fortunate or down on their luck.

But hey. I can't help myself. I am a natural optimist.

No, we speak regularly. She likes her plan (at least she likes it better than not having one), she just believes it is not Obamacare.

And that is realistically the choice we face. We cover people as a cost of society.... or we don't. It is true that the emergency medical treatment and labor act of 1986 causes costs to rise as more free riders accrue in the system. It is also why we don't have a significantly worse mortality rate and life expectancy rate.

A society in which health care is reserved for the comparatively affluent disgusts me, personally, but it is the realistic small-government alternative.

Humanity isn't going to cover medical costs for those who are struggling.

Provide for themselves? Families are struggling to pay insurance premiums now. Medication costs more in the US than other countries. And you think people will magically find money for health care?

Either you are ignorant of reality or willfully ignoring. it.

What do you mean? That's exactly what youre saying whether you understand it or not seems to be the problem.

You pay for insurance because there is a 99% chance in your lifetime, yourself or one of your family members under your health care plan will be in the hospital or have to deal with a health issue that will cost well above what you've paid in a lifetime for insurance. Is it a great system? No, its actually horrible. But the only answer is universal or single payer. The definitive no-go answer, is anything else. We;ve sen everything else, and they've all unquestionably failed. The ACA is better than anything else we've had installed, and its better than anything the GOP or anyone else has suggested thats not single payer. The suggestions that it should not be mandatory, kind of defeats the purpose. The suggestions to remove certain aspects, again, kind of defeats the purpose and puts us in the same position we were in before.

Maybe you have, i dont know. But it seems to me that anyone who has, would very much understand how their situation is better.... and btw, i think you would have mentioned these things instead of suggesting a GP over and over without needing any of kind specialist or advanced treatments, scripts, etc.

@LJS9502_basic said: Humanity isn't going to cover medical costs for those who are struggling.

When you say "humanity" what you really mean is corrupted corporate politicians in the United States. Because as a whole humanity has figured this out, has a viable solution to it and the only time it gets disrupted is when corporate interests get in the way (or sometimes Church interests). But yah.... humanity figured this shit out long ago.

Humanity isn't going to cover medical costs for those that are struggling?? If not humanity, then who? It seems the question is, will humanity cover those costs voluntarily, or must we threaten them with force if they don't, or confiscate their wealth (under threat of force) and make them cover it by coercion. Not to be too much of a smartass, but I am not aware of another species that is going to do it besides humanity.

I never intimated that my suggestion was the cure-all for the problems with the US healthcare payment system. I was trying to point out that life creates its own mandate for providing yourself a way to pay for health care. Through government coercion of health care providers to provide care to those who will not pay, whether by choice or due to circumstance, we have tried to remove that natural mandate, only to replace it with an artificial one via legislation.

Perhaps we should acknowledge that there is a mandate for each adult to provide these basic necessities for themselves, and abandon this notion that there is a right to health care.

You know, LJ, I am not ignorant, willfully or otherwise. If you feel you must negatively characterize someone's beliefs and attitudes you disagree with, then lets just end this here.

Good luck to your Steelers today. I've gotten over my Chiefs losing to them, and I say go beat those damn Patriots.

Thanks for your reply.

I can sympathize with your desire to want everyone to have access to health care. I just want to believe that we can find the virtue as a society to accomplish that without resorting to government coercion.

Honestly dude reality is if people wanted to help others they wouldn't be whining about the government programs designed to do such. The fact that many people are adverse show the lie in your reality. Making insurance mandatory means there should be a big enough pool to cover the costs so those with little discretionary money can also have healthcare. And yet here we are with people complaining. So exactly how does humanity stack up now?

Also the government should provide some safety net in certain areas. The military, health insurance, food/housing for those unable to do so. Those are not luxury items. We waste tons of money on things we need not. Including the excessive costs for the military. I'm for a strong military but there is a lot of waste that can....and should...be cut.

A right to healthcare is more important that the right to bear arms....yet I don't see anyone wanting to take that right away. I mean we need all those militias they provide.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right of negative obligation, just like the right to free speech. I am obligated to NOT interfere in your exercise of your right, but I am not obligated to provide you a gun, a bullhorn, or a soap box to stand on.

If health care is a right, someone must provide it. That means government must then use its police power to coerce those with the skills and facilities to provide it for you.

To the first paragraph of your reply: The fact that I am unhappy with being forced to help my fellow man under threat of government force does not prove I am unwilling to be charitable of my own free will.

If my neighbor asks me nicely to cut his grass and keep an eye on his place for a couple weeks cuz he's going on vacation, I'd be happy to help out. If he shows up at my door with a cop and says if I don't cut his grass while he's gone, the cop is going to punish me, I'd be far less inclined do it happily.

We don't have to look back far to realize the "government involvement is unnecessary because companies will naturally provide to everyone" mentality is a unicorn-and-rainbows fantasy - If you want to avoid going as far back as the act of 1986, just look at the exclusion of those with pre-existing conditions prior to the ACA.

To be clear, I was not suggesting that companies would be the vehicle by which we accomplish this.

All societies have virtues: Characteristics and behaviors exhibited by the individuals in that society that are considered good, and therefore are to be expected from everyone. In the context of this discussion, the 2 virtues I am advocating are:

1. Doing what you must in order to provide this basic need for yourself

And

2. Coming together with folks of like mind, and sufficient means, to do the basic good of helping those in need, and providing for those who are afflicted in such as way as to never be able to provide for themselves.

I may be delusional, but I it's my belief that we make a greater contribution to a better society by becoming better individuals than we can by advocating for better government programs.

@collegeboy64:

Healthcare is not something that should be left up to chance. I'd rather provide the means for people to have healthcare than to pay for the actual care which is way too costly.

By your example we shouldn't pay for a military. Let the gun owners protect the country. We shouldn't pay for education etc.

Also providing medical treatment is a boon to society. If people cannot pay for preventive medicine then sickness can become an epidemic.

And just to give you an idea of why your way isn't what you think it is...costs are inflated to cover those that don't/can't pay. So you actually ARE paying with your insurance premiums.

I respect your viewpoint. I believe you want people to be healthy and flourish, as do I.

Not sure how you get that my beliefs lead to no government spending on the military. Providing for a national defense is a clearly stated obligation of the federal government. As for education, I am not against public education, but I would prefer it not be so heavily directed and funded by the federal government. I believe the people of each state are fully capable of educating their children without the aid of the benevolent hand of Washington DC.

I fully understand that our current system of health insurance, even before the ACA, has elements of socialism to it. Doesn't mean I have to like it :)

Good talking with you LJ. I think we've beat this one to death.

Again, Go Steelers. I am hoping for a Pittsburgh-Atlanta Super Bowl. Looks like I've got half my wish so far.

You attributed me to having a family when I have never stated such.

As far as seeing a specialist, I have. $88 for an orthopedist. The last time I visited an orthopedic surgeon, it was still only $100.

If you're referring to 1) paying for healthcare when you can and 2) covering any deficiencies with communal support, then there are numerous illustrations of why that doesn't work, some of which I've lived through as one of the "helpers" myself. The bottom line is this: A catastrophic illness is simply too much for an individual and their local neighbors/church/friends/family to handle.

I'm referring to

1) the individual responsibility to make provisions to pay for a combination of out-of-pocket and covered, or insured, health care expenses. The nature of that arrangement is up to the individual. If you have an employer that offers to include you in their group plan, and even cover part of the premiums, as part of your compensation, great. If you have coverage through your union, or a professional guild, or even an individual policy, whatever works best for that person. Whatever form it takes, its your responsibility to make those decisions AND pay for them.

2) If you are one of us who has been blessed with success and an excess of riches, put your wealth, and your skills, and your time to work solving problems in your community. Its a far better use of your energy and will bring you much more personal satisfaction than looking to the government to do it. And by blessed with success and an excess of riches, I'm not saying just the "rich" or the "wealthy" bear this burden. If you have your basic needs covered, and can afford some luxury in your life, be glad. And show it by giving back when and where you can.

I think it is absurd we are even discussing this because the answer is obvious.. Look at the other countries in the west that are absolutely kicking the crap out of us in not only healthcare quality but overall cost per citizen.. I personally don't care whether our health industry is profit motivated and private or public government and ran, I care about how EFFECTIVE it is and how affordable it is.. And based on what we have seen in places like the UK, they not only pay far less but they beat the US healthcare system in every metric possible..

Not entirely accurate. The real problem is the cost of health care. If services and care weren't so pricey, insurance wouldn't be so costly. You don't see this problem in the auto industry or home industry where insurance is also required.

Those industries also don't have nearly the level of insurance that medical care does. Medical care is the center of, IIRC, about three or four different types of insurances intersecting to affect costs.

I'd take the odds to Vegas that this is because you have a co-pay with your insurance that you're not mentioning. Most do. And given what you say your deductible is, id see no reason to assume yours didnt.

No, no co-pay as no insurance. I have even had x-rays taken of my chest as well as my ankle/foot and received a 40% discount due to the fact that I was paying at the time of service. Even the chest MRI I had this past fall was under $100 as I paid at time of service.

No co-pay?

Hummm...... even the worst of worst insurances have co-pay.....who did you go through again? What plan do you have? Single person who is paying an almost 9 thousand dollar deductible but does not have co-pays.... im very interested in this plan you have.

I had no insurance then as I have no insurance now. Any plan I was looking at had at least a $6000 deductible (which is now up to $6850) and no co-pay. That runs about $700 a month. I still would have to pay for a doctor's visit with even a Bronze plan (I guess you do not know that there are 4 tiers to insurance now, each with their own requirements and costs).