3 ms·

>With the guarantees to the insurance companies built into the law the public will end up footing an even larger bill which requires increase taxes and health c

by rtpg 13y ago

>With the guarantees to the insurance companies built into the law the public will end up footing an even larger bill which requires increase taxes and health care costs for those working putting a bigger drag on the economy. I don't get it. If we are footing the bill, then it will make higher taxes, but if the insurance companies foot the bill then health care costs increase. There's no reason for both to rise (unless we subsidize the insurance companies through taxes on the insurance companies...)

hga 13y ago
"There's no reason for both to rise" The "visible foot of the government" is quite enough. 2,000 pages of unread "law" can force all sorts of negative changes, and then there's the electronic health record (EHR) requirements in the "stimulus" bill, including the single sentence on requiring "meaningful use" which expanded into 700 pages of regulations, a lot of well paid consulting, and what looks like so far worse medical care as healthcare workers have to focus on the computer instead of the patient to avoid losing their jobs. There's also the host of taxes in Obamacare; just the medical device tax alone will obviously raise the cost of care.
- rtpg 13y ago
  what I meant was that there's no reason for both to arise simply from the risk corridor provision. Obviously other stuff can make it rise.
  - hga 13y ago
    Ah, sorry, I didn't read what you were quoting carefully enough, although aren't there 3 or so "guarantees", 2 in addition to the risk corridors? Risk corridors by themselves, obviously not. Except if you ignore the fungibility of money aren't they ostensibly paid for by taxes on policies?? On the other hand "guarantees" will put less pressure on insurance companies to put pressure on suppliers of health care, resulting in less displacement to other customers.

3 ms·

>With the guarantees to the insurance companies built into the law the public will end up footing an even larger bill which requires increase taxes and health c

by rtpg 13y ago

hga 13y ago
"There's no reason for both to rise" The "visible foot of the government" is quite enough. 2,000 pages of unread "law" can force all sorts of negative changes, and then there's the electronic health record (EHR) requirements in the "stimulus" bill, including the single sentence on requiring "meaningful use" which expanded into 700 pages of regulations, a lot of well paid consulting, and what looks like so far worse medical care as healthcare workers have to focus on the computer instead of the patient to avoid losing their jobs. There's also the host of taxes in Obamacare; just the medical device tax alone will obviously raise the cost of care.
- rtpg 13y ago
  what I meant was that there's no reason for both to arise simply from the risk corridor provision. Obviously other stuff can make it rise.
  - hga 13y ago
    Ah, sorry, I didn't read what you were quoting carefully enough, although aren't there 3 or so "guarantees", 2 in addition to the risk corridors? Risk corridors by themselves, obviously not. Except if you ignore the fungibility of money aren't they ostensibly paid for by taxes on policies?? On the other hand "guarantees" will put less pressure on insurance companies to put pressure on suppliers of health care, resulting in less displacement to other customers.