- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ACA Improved Care and Health Among Low-Income Adults
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:05 am to Big dub
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:05 am to Big dub
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:07 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:FALSE!
You're gonna pay anyway.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:08 am to BamaAtl
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:13 am to BamaAtl
quote:No jackass, it isn't.
This is a lie
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:15 am to BamaAtl
quote: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
ACA Improved Care and Health Among Low-Income Adults by BamaAtl
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:21 am to BamaAtl
And back in the real world and beyond statistics and data, millions can't afford their insurance anymore.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:26 am to BamaAtl
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:33 am to BamaAtl
Socialist scum.
You want to steal from the working class to give to the lazy.
You want to steal from the working class to give to the lazy.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:36 am to BamaAtl
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 on 5/18/17 at 8:38 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
FALSE!
Correct.
You are already paying. My bad.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 8:53 am to TigerTattle
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.
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 on 5/18/17 at 9:23 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:Because the ACA is in place.
You are already paying. My bad.
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 on 5/18/17 at 9:54 am to bamarep
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 on 5/18/17 at 9:57 am to BamaAtl
The losers outnumber the winners.
Failure is imminent.
Failure is imminent.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:08 am to BamaAtl
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 on 5/18/17 at 10:11 am to LSU alum wannabe
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 on 5/18/17 at 10:12 am to Roll Tide Ravens
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 on 5/18/17 at 10:13 am to BamaAtl
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?
Liberal conclusion: see how much happier the middle class is when we get programs for the poor and give them the money?
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:16 am to BamaAtl
quote:
BamaAtl
"please someone pay for my health insurance, I'm too irresponsible to take care if it myself..."
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:21 am to Bristol Dawg
quote:Here's a "metric" for you: The chance of posting bullshite like that here and getting away with it unscathed, is roughly zero.
What's so funny is that you guys are blabbing about your personal and completely misinformed views.
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
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News