Started By
Message

re: ACA Improved Care and Health Among Low-Income Adults

Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:05 am to
Posted by LSU alum wannabe
Katy, TX
Member since Jan 2004
26994 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:05 am to
quote:

So basically what they are saying is I should pay more in insurance even though I have not been to the doctor in 2 years because it helps people who choose not to work?




You're gonna pay anyway. They'll be on Medicaid or Medicare.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123908 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:07 am to
quote:

You're gonna pay anyway.
FALSE!
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
35028 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:08 am to
quote:

a $337 reduction in annual out-of-pocket spending


What a loser. I'm saving much more. frick the abomination that is the ACA.


Also, is it really a "saving" if their "savings" is passed on to others 10 fold?

Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123908 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:13 am to
quote:

This is a lie
No jackass, it isn't.
I don't lie. The counties with no remaining ACA access don't lie. The entire state of Iowa doesn't lie. The financials don't lie. The fact that Obamacare Cost Escalation vastly outstrips health care cost escalation doesn't lie.

Obamacare is terminal. You're either in denial or you're lying.
Posted by TigerTattle
Out of Town
Member since Sep 2007
6623 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:15 am to
quote:

ACA Improved Care and Health Among Low-Income Adults by BamaAtl
And as usual the middle income people are ignored --- you know, the ones who can't afford the deductible after paying the monstrous premium required of them to finance
SallySue's sexcapades entertainment and consequences (bc, stds, abortions, childbirth, obstetrics)

Heshela's free elective sex-change surgery

Free pediatric medical, dental, and vision for their offspring to the extent that the payers can't afford to provide for their own kids in the way they would like, and in some cases can't afford to have kids of at all.

Wild Willie's 15th trip through drug rehab

on and on

Go ahead, downvote, but you know it's true.




Posted by Roll Tide Ravens
Birmingham, AL
Member since Nov 2015
42375 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:21 am to
And back in the real world and beyond statistics and data, millions can't afford their insurance anymore.
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54209 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:26 am to
quote:

This is a lie and you -should- know better


Damn man, even the Dems on the hill as a whole aren't defending this piece of shite. They're just raising hell about the replacement.
Posted by Dead End
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2013
21237 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:33 am to
Socialist scum.

You want to steal from the working class to give to the lazy.
Posted by heartbreakTiger
grinding for my grinders
Member since Jan 2008
138974 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:36 am to
Who cares about low income adults? They shouldn't be allowed to vote and probably shouldn't be more than food for other poors
Posted by LSU alum wannabe
Katy, TX
Member since Jan 2004
26994 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:38 am to
quote:

FALSE!


Correct.

You are already paying. My bad.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111519 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:53 am to
Talked to a small business owner yesterday.

1) When Obamacare went into effect, she had well over 50 employees. She winnowed her employees down to under 50 to avoid the prohibitive costs of the new small group premiums and dropped health coverage for her employees.

2). Her own personal plan went from $600/mo with a deductible under $1000 to $1400/mo with a $6000 deductible

3). The administrative burden on employers has gotten exponentially worse. She had an employee who worked for her 4 hrs per week doing some light filing. The employee put down her company as her employer when she went onto the exchange for insurance. The government than asked for multiple documents from the employer to verify that she wasn't full time. They did not inquire of the employee when she was on the exchange asking for insurance if she was full-time. Let that sink in.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123908 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 9:23 am to
quote:

You are already paying. My bad.
Because the ACA is in place.
Lest you attempt to bastardize the discussion further, we are talking about cost of obamacare policies.

As obamacare cost escalation exceeds median healthcare cost inflation by an average of 3.8X or 380% (depending on the state, by as much as 1780%) NOT INCLUDING DEDUCTIBLES, obviously there are less expensive, more efficient insurance possibilities available.
Posted by Bristol Dawg
God's Country
Member since Jul 2016
2934 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 9:54 am to
quote:



It further turned ED's into primary physician centers.


What's so funny is that you guys are blabbing about your personal and completely misinformed views. Quoted the above because like most of the counter comments, it's so far from the truth and actually opposite. Accountability is required from both ends and nationally, ED visits have dramatically reduced. It's a primary focus of the ACA and required metric for ACO's/IDNs.
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
67909 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 9:57 am to
The losers outnumber the winners.

Failure is imminent.
Posted by DawgsLife
Member since Jun 2013
58915 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:08 am to
quote:

The AHCA covers fewer people, with worse coverage, and is less affordable.



And you know this how? it hasn't been passed yet and there will be changes made, primarily by your side. (Liberals)

Before ObamaCare was passed we were told premiums would go down, we could keep our doctors and we could keep our insurance. Things change from an ideal of what insurance will be and reality.
Posted by DawgsLife
Member since Jun 2013
58915 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:11 am to
quote:

So basically what they are saying is I should pay more in insurance even though I have not been to the doctor in 2 years because it helps people who choose not to work?



You're gonna pay anyway. They'll be on Medicaid or Medicare.


And that would be different how? Only now we are paying in MUCH higher premiums.

Honest questions.

1. Do you pay for your own health insurance or does you job or parents?

2. If you pay for your own, do you get subsidies?

3. If you are completely out of pocket, how much has your premiums gone up in the last 3-4 years?
Posted by DawgsLife
Member since Jun 2013
58915 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:12 am to
quote:

And back in the real world and beyond statistics and data, millions can't afford their insurance anymore.


True. And they are required to have it under penalty of law.
Posted by cokebottleag
I’m a Santos Republican
Member since Aug 2011
24028 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:13 am to
Obamacare cuts spending to Medicare and reduces the scope of the program.

Liberal conclusion: see how much happier the middle class is when we get programs for the poor and give them the money?
Posted by JGTiger
Member since Aug 2007
2940 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:16 am to
quote:

BamaAtl


"please someone pay for my health insurance, I'm too irresponsible to take care if it myself..."
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123908 posts
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:21 am to
quote:

What's so funny is that you guys are blabbing about your personal and completely misinformed views.
Here's a "metric" for you: The chance of posting bullshite like that here and getting away with it unscathed, is roughly zero.


LINK

quote:

Increased Emergency Department Use in Illinois After Implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Scott M. Dresden, MD, MS*; Emilie S. Powell, MD, MS; Raymond Kang, MA; Megan McHugh, PhD; Andrew J. Cooper, MPH;
Joe Feinglass, PhD

Study objective: We examine emergency department (ED) use and hospitalizations through the ED after Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) health insurance expansion in Illinois, a Medicaid expansion state.

Methods: Using statewide hospital administrative data from 2011 through 2015 from 201 nonfederal Illinois hospitals for patients aged 18 to 64 years, mean monthly ED visits were compared before and after ACA implementation by disposition from the ED and primary payer. Visit data were combined with 2010 to 2014 census insurance estimates to compute payer-specific ED visit rates. Interrupted time-series analyses tested changes in ED visit rates and ED hospitalization rates by insurance type after ACA implementation.

Results: Average monthly ED visit volume increased by 14,080 visits (95% confidence interval [CI] 4,670 to 23,489), a 5.7% increase, after ACA implementation. Changes by payer were as follows: uninsured decreased by 24,158 (95% CI 27,037 to 21,279), Medicaid increased by 28,746 (95% CI 23,945 to 33,546), and private insurance increased by 9,966 (95% 6,241 to 13,690). The total monthly ED visit rate increased by 1.8 visits per 1,000 residents (95% CI 0.6 to 3.0). The monthly ED visit rate decreased by 8.7 visit per 1,000 uninsured residents (95% CI 11.1 to 6.3) and increased by 10.2 visit per 1,000 Medicaid beneficiaries (95% CI 4.4 to 16.1) and 1.3 visits per 1,000 privately insured residents (95% CI 0.6 to 1.9). After adjusting for baseline trends and season, these changes remained statistically significant. The total number of hospitalizations through the ED was unchanged.

Conclusion: ED visits by adults aged 18 to 64 years in Illinois increased after ACA health insurance expansion. The increase in total ED visits was driven by an increase in visits resulting in discharge from the ED. A large post-ACA increase in Medicaid visits and a modest increase in privately insured visits outpaced a large reduction in ED visits by uninsured patients. These changes are larger than can be explained by population changes alone and are significantly
different from trends in ED use before ACA implementation. [Ann Emerg Med. 2016;-:1-9.]

LINK

quote:

Effect of Medicaid Coverage on ED Use — Further Evidence from Oregon’s Experiment
Amy N. Finkelstein, Ph.D., Sarah L. Taubman, Ph.D., Heidi L. Allen, Ph.D., Bill J. Wright, Ph.D., and Katherine Baicker, Ph.D.
N Engl J Med 2016; 375:1505-1507October 20, 2016DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1609533

The effect of Medicaid coverage on health and the use of health care services is of first-order policy importance, particularly as policymakers consider expansions of public health insurance. Estimating the effects of expanding Medicaid is challenging, however, because Medicaid enrollees and the uninsured differ in many ways that may also affect outcomes of interest. Oregon’s 2008 expansion of Medicaid through random-lottery selection of potential enrollees from a waiting list offers the opportunity to assess Medicaid’s effects with a randomized evaluation that is not contaminated by such confounding factors. In a previous examination of the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, we found that Medicaid coverage increased health care use across a range of settings, improved financial security, and reduced rates of depression among enrollees, but it produced no detectable changes in several measures of physical health, employment rates, or earnings.1-4

A key finding was that Medicaid increased emergency department (ED) visits by 40% in the first 15 months after people won the lottery.3 This finding was greeted with considerable attention and surprise, given the widespread belief that expanding Medicaid coverage to more uninsured people would encourage the use of primary care and thereby reduce ED use.

LINK


This post was edited on 5/18/17 at 10:34 am
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram