Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Self employed folks; healthcare?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ohio Snake" data-source="post: 15767496" data-attributes="member: 157862"><p>“Free loaders” are just part of the problem and applies to those with non-group coverage. Doing a full repeal will send premiums skyrocketing for everyone as those not wanting healthcare fall off the grid reducing the premium pool to spread the risk. </p><p></p><p>Also, carriers have spent billions to conform to the ACA only to loose billions on the non-group program. Those carriers already said screw it, we’re done and exited the individual side ( Aetna, United and some state BCBS plans are done). </p><p></p><p>Talk about a huge public backlash for full repeal when people are denied coverage and premiums skyrocket. If I were a republican (or democratic) lawmaker, I would not want that backlash on my party especially with the mid- term elections. Hence the reason some republicans are fighting within their party to not repeal the ACA with what has been presented.</p><p></p><p>Those that want just a full repeal, may not realize how that may compound the problem. In my opinion, the lawmakers need take a step back to assess the issues from all angles including providers and carriers and then either 1.) repeal the ACA WITH new better balanced immediate plan or 2.) amend the current ACA plan.</p><p></p><p></p><p>BTW-There was a high risk pool for those uninsurable before ACA. Most could not afford it and it was indirectly subsidized by the carriers in each state. </p><p></p><p>Again, there is no easy answer. This is not just about premiums. Personally , I think the part of the answer lies with containing cost by standardizing what providers charge for services. Your comment on medicare kind of leads down this pathway.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ohio Snake, post: 15767496, member: 157862"] “Free loaders” are just part of the problem and applies to those with non-group coverage. Doing a full repeal will send premiums skyrocketing for everyone as those not wanting healthcare fall off the grid reducing the premium pool to spread the risk. Also, carriers have spent billions to conform to the ACA only to loose billions on the non-group program. Those carriers already said screw it, we’re done and exited the individual side ( Aetna, United and some state BCBS plans are done). Talk about a huge public backlash for full repeal when people are denied coverage and premiums skyrocket. If I were a republican (or democratic) lawmaker, I would not want that backlash on my party especially with the mid- term elections. Hence the reason some republicans are fighting within their party to not repeal the ACA with what has been presented. Those that want just a full repeal, may not realize how that may compound the problem. In my opinion, the lawmakers need take a step back to assess the issues from all angles including providers and carriers and then either 1.) repeal the ACA WITH new better balanced immediate plan or 2.) amend the current ACA plan. BTW-There was a high risk pool for those uninsurable before ACA. Most could not afford it and it was indirectly subsidized by the carriers in each state. Again, there is no easy answer. This is not just about premiums. Personally , I think the part of the answer lies with containing cost by standardizing what providers charge for services. Your comment on medicare kind of leads down this pathway. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Self employed folks; healthcare?
Top