Shut Down Optics

[Viratas]

2 minutes ago, red viking said:

LOL. If they could afford it. Also, notice the question. Read carefully: ....IF NEEDED. Most people are willing to do something when it's "NEEDED" anyway. What a BS question. Meanwhile, satisfaction with U.S. healthcare is at a 24-year low. > 50% of Canadians are satisfied with their healthcare. AI is nice. 

Yes Americans is at a all time low, ever since ACA and Obasim Care.

[red viking]

1 minute ago, Viratas said:

Yes Americans is at a all time low, ever since ACA and Obasim Care.

Overall, Canadians are happier w/ their healthcare. Healthcare in U.S. is complete crap. It's only good for the ultra rich or those w/ good insurance. It's a ripoff for taxpayers too. We don't need new technologies coming out every single day and new drugs and forcing taxpayers to fund them so 80 year old people can live an extra couple months. That's what's breaking the system. Not simple stuff going to poor people. 

Edited October 28, 2025 by red viking

[Viratas]

Just now, red viking said:

No; he openly accepts bribes. Huge bribes. For political favors. 

LOL See.... Straw Man..... Yes AOC Just became rich from the rich fairy... Maybe your issue is with people who actually earn their money? 

[Viratas]

Just now, red viking said:

Overall, Canadians are happier w/ their healthcare. Healthcare in U.S. is complete crap. It's only good for the ultra rich or those w/ good insurance. It's a ripoff for taxpayers too. 

Again, I agree. Ever since the ACA and Obamacare, it has become complete crap. Glad you are opening your eyes. I feel like we have had a real breakthrough today!

[red viking]

1 minute ago, Viratas said:

LOL See.... Straw Man..... Yes AOC Just became rich from the rich fairy... Maybe your issue is with people who actually earn their money? 

His net worth went up 50% just in first few months of presidency. Politicians often become rich. That's typical, so you're presenting another strawman. But they don't make what Trump is taking in with his meme coin bribery, etc. 

[Viratas]

Just now, red viking said:

His net worth went up 50% just in first few months of presidency. Politicians often become rich. That's typical, so you're presenting another strawman. But they don't make what Trump is taking in with his meme coin bribery, etc. 

Oh so its ok if you are Dumbocrate, Got you.... Please offer that source up please

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, mspart said:

Yes.   Doctors and surgeons go to insane amounts of school and training.   They should be rewarded for that effort.   Things cost money.   MRI, CT, Xray, electro shock machines, and all other equipment are expensive.   The people that make these should make money to incentivize more innovation.   Research costs money.   What about healthcare should be non profit?  

mspart

So you agree, if more people were able to afford the services of the healthcare industry then there would be more innovation in the healthcare industry to help people live longer and better lives?

Because right now people are being priced out of being able to go to doctors and get MRIs so the hospitals in rural and urban areas are closing or will be closing soon if the current ACA package is passed. 

Really I guess my question is should there even be a health insurance industry for healthcare that is deemed to be vitally necessary to support someone’s life(there can be a whole other conversation about what is deemed vitally necessary). If so, should it be for profit? If so, explain how that’s not immoral? 
 

BTW, incentive for profit doesn’t spur innovation. 
 

What shouldn’t be for profit? Everything that isn’t voluntary. Certain areas of plastic surgery absolutely make that for profit. Certain areas of beautification lasers and stuff sure make that for profit. There will always be people interested in paying for stuff like that and if they wanna share the cost over a large pool of people, I’m all for that. I’m sure somebody will find a way to make a profit. But those aren’t necessary for people to live. Nursing homes should be free. Rehab should be free. Regular visits to a doctor should be free. Extra extraordinary care at an emergency room should be  free. Getting a heart transplant should be free getting chemotherapy should be free. 
I’m not saying no one should pay for it or doctors and nurses to profit.but for the user it should be free. Am I wrong?

[Scouts Honor]

30 minutes ago, red viking said:

 Rampant corruption occurring right now by Trumptard and you're worried about stuff the Clintons are doing years after they're done. Unbelievable hypocrisy. 

where... show us..

 

[Scouts Honor]

37 minutes ago, red viking said:

Overall, Canadians feel better about their health care than Americans. Here, health care is a complete ripoff and poor people get crappy care

Canadian feelings about their healthcare are mixed, with a significant portion of the population dissatisfied due to issues like long wait times, lack of staff, and bureaucratic inefficiency. While the principle of universal, tax-funded healthcare remains popular, many Canadians are concerned about access and timely delivery, and believe the system is not performing well. 

[Scouts Honor]

31 minutes ago, red viking said:

LOL. If they could afford it. Also, notice the question. Read carefully: ....IF NEEDED. Most people are willing to do something when it's "NEEDED" anyway. What a BS question. Meanwhile, satisfaction with U.S. healthcare is at a 24-year low. > 50% of Canadians are satisfied with their healthcare. AI is nice. 

• Dissatisfaction: In 2024, less than half of Canadians (48%) were satisfied with their provincial healthcare system, a number that has been consistent for several years.

[Scouts Honor]

28 minutes ago, red viking said:

No; he openly accepts bribes. Huge bribes. For political favors. 

10% for the big guy? 

[Scouts Honor]

corruption you say?

 

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Caveira said:

Ok so it was predicted to make it more expensive….. on the promise of making it cheaper. 
 

is this the twilight zone or do politics and politicians suck ?

also wasn’t it supposed that the super poor are super unhealthy because of no health care.  That I I pay it for them via awesomeness then they would be super healthy and less of a burden on the health care system in the long run.  Over time that would make it super awesome and cheaper for everyone.
 

But.  Like everything the government touches.   That was all a lie.  They knew that.  We knew that but we keep on truckin.  
 

What a long strange trip it’s been boss.  

Text me if I’m wrong, but it really seems like this is your argument:

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2021/02/15/public-pools-used-to-be-everywhere-in-america-then-racism-shut-them-down

‘We can’t all have a good thing because THOSE people might actually use it!’
It might not be racist but it’s not far off. 
Am I wrong? Do some people just not deserve to live at least a healthy life?

[fishbane]

49 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

ACA was the largest tax increase (yes tax, the SC said so) on the middle class in the history of the world.

out of pocket costs DID NOT decrease for those people.

Health care costs don't fall easily across class lines. It's more healthy vs unhealthy rather than middle vs upper vs lower.  

It's funny that you mention that supreme court case.  One of the cases that was consolidated into that decision was Florida suing the federal government.  Now Florida has more individuals signed up for plans through the marketplace than any other state.  I think an agreement will eventually be reached to extend some level of enhanced premium tax credits for some period of time.  There are too many beneficiaries in red states that letting them expire completely could be a problem for Republicans.  If I am right then the Republicans unwillingness to negotiate during the shutdown could result in them paying the political cost.  That could shift if the democrats hold out looking for long term extension at the existing funding level.

[JimmySpeaks]

4 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Text me if I’m wrong, but it really seems like this is your argument:

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2021/02/15/public-pools-used-to-be-everywhere-in-america-then-racism-shut-them-down

‘We can’t all have a good thing because THOSE people might actually use it!’
It might not be racist but it’s not far off. 
Am I wrong? Do some people just not deserve to live at least a healthy life?

According to @red viking the elderly don’t.  He’s too stupid to realize someday he might just be old.  

[JimmySpeaks]

4 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Health care costs don't fall easily across class lines. It's more healthy vs unhealthy rather than middle vs upper vs lower.  

It's funny that you mention that supreme court case.  One of the cases that was consolidated into that decision was Florida suing the federal government.  Now Florida has more individuals signed up for plans through the marketplace than any other state.  I think an agreement will eventually be reached to extend some level of enhanced premium tax credits for some period of time.  There are too many beneficiaries in red states that letting them expire completely could be a problem for Republicans.  If I am right then the Republicans unwillingness to negotiate during the shutdown could result in them paying the political cost.  That could shift if the democrats hold out looking for long term extension at the existing funding level.

Does this include supplemental plans ???? 

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Viratas said:

Ok, let me start by saying I do not know every issue that their current group is fighting for, I understand on a high level. But I have had a beef with Obamacare from day 1.

ACA is the Subprime Market of HealthCare.

Fannie and Freddie guaranteed mortgages, removing risk from the lender (banks).  ACA subsidies guarantee payments to insurers (health plans), removing price risk.

Lenders had less incentive to be careful about loan quality or home price inflation because the government was backing the loan. Insurers/Providers have less incentive to lower the actual cost of care because a subsidy shields the patient, and a government guarantee of payment shields the insurer.

The risk was ultimately "dumped" onto the taxpayer when the market collapsed. The underlying cost inflation is ultimately "dumped" onto the taxpayer and the national debt through permanent, ever-increasing subsidies.

So my question is, at what point do we learn a lesson? I understand that when the Govt. Guaranteeing money to anyone or anything will lead to economic issues. I have yet to see any objective justification for $1.5 trillion. Why are Dems demanding a 10-year extension in a temp bill to keep the government open?

This is a political play on both sides; I'm not sure which side it will backfire on yet, and in the end, as is generally the case, the Taxpayer (not the poor) will be screwed.

I totally get what you’re saying. Same thing happened with education debt I think. When people see a big pot of money they go looking for a way to access it. We were talking about pensions in a previous thread. That’s the same thing.  A big pot of money. 
 

If rules aren’t put in place to secure that big pot of money. Others with seemingly large pot of money will spend their money to try to access a bigger pot of money. 
 

but I don’t see Health Insurance the same way. If the government is paying for it, then the profit motive is spread out over a wide swath of people. Be that doctors nurse’s surgeons hospital administrators. Conceivably it would be a bigger risk to try and work the system to get rich rather than just doing your job and getting paid. 
 

Whereas private health insurance have a large pool of people that pay them regularly and all they have to do is not pay for healthcare and they get to keep all that money. So all they have to do is figure out ways of denying people claims and no one get paid that isn’t good for anybody except the health insurance company. And unless laws are put in place to keep them from doing that which is what the ACA tried to do, that’s what they’re gonna do again large pot of money.

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Scouts Honor said:

lol

this was planned.

they knew what was going to happen.

and now say they expected people to suffer ... so they could use it as a bargaining chip

Please explain the conditions to which the ACA was originally voted on and signed which could explain this theory? 

Then provide examples of who is following through with that plan and how? Then connect the dots between the two. 
The last part is the most important because without anybody following through with it with that motive, your whole theory is BS. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

48 minutes ago, red viking said:

No; he openly accepts bribes. Huge bribes. For political favors. 

You’re actually honest that’s hard to deny

[Caveira]

21 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Text me if I’m wrong, but it really seems like this is your argument:

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2021/02/15/public-pools-used-to-be-everywhere-in-america-then-racism-shut-them-down

‘We can’t all have a good thing because THOSE people might actually use it!’
It might not be racist but it’s not far off. 
Am I wrong? Do some people just not deserve to live at least a healthy life?

Who are “those” people?    
 

there are also two pools near my house.   

Edited October 28, 2025 by Caveira

[ThreePointTakedown]

48 minutes ago, Viratas said:

Yes Americans is at an all time low, ever since ACA and Obasim Care.

Correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation. 

[fishbane]

35 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Does this include supplemental plans ???? 

Probably?  This is the definition for that field

"Total Consumers Who Have Selected a Marketplace Plan: represents consumers who selected or were automatically reenrolled into a Marketplace medical plan (regardless of whether the consumer paid the premium) as of the end of the open enrollment period."

[Scouts Honor]

55 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Please explain the conditions to which the ACA was originally voted on and signed which could explain this theory? 

Then provide examples of who is following through with that plan and how? Then connect the dots between the two. 
The last part is the most important because without anybody following through with it with that motive, your whole theory is BS. 

still waiting for you to show your work on how aca fixed things 

[ThreePointTakedown]

33 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

still waiting for you to show your work on how aca fixed things 

I don’t think I ever said it fixed anything. Tried to fix things sure. But half measures rarely work. As we’re seeing now. 
 

So unless you can point out where I made that comment, please go ahead and connect the dots for your theory. 

[Viratas]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation. 

Of course not. You and I probably agree on one thing: we would like to see quality, affordable care for ALL Americans, not just the rich or the poor. At least we would agree, I do not want to make assumptions, but I am guessing we are on the same page. 

Yes, AI, but it can also provide you with resources.

Here’s a breakdown of what happened:

1. Premium Costs

• From 2013 to 2019, premiums for individual (non-group) plans roughly doubled nationally, though rate growth slowed after 2020.

• Subsidy-eligible enrollees (lower income) were largely insulated, but middle-class families earning above roughly 400% of the federal poverty level (around $120k for a family of four in 2025) often paid full price.

• Many in this bracket saw monthly premiums exceeding $1,000–$1,500 per household for silver-tier plans.

2. Out-of-Pocket Costs

• ACA-compliant plans introduced minimum essential coverage and no annual/lifetime limits, but to balance risk, insurers increased deductibles and coinsurance.

• The average deductible for a silver plan is now over $5,000 per person, compared to about $2,500 before 2014.

• Cost-sharing reductions only apply to lower-income enrollees, so middle-income households pay the full deductible and out-of-pocket max (often $8,000+).

3. Net Benefits and Coverage Networks

• Mandated “essential health benefits” added coverage categories (mental health, maternity, etc.), but insurers offset costs by narrowing provider networks.

• Many middle-class self-employed workers or early retirees now find fewer doctors in-network and limited plan options.

4. Winners vs. Losers

• Winners: Low-income, previously uninsured Americans and people with preexisting conditions.

• Losers: Middle-income individuals and small business owners not receiving subsidies.

• Neutral: Large-employer plans have changed less, though cost-sharing has still trended upward due to general healthcare inflation.

If you’d like, I can show you a chart comparing average premiums and out-of-pocket maximums from 2013 to 2025 for single vs. family coverage to visually summarize the change. Would you like that?