The only real similarity is the expansion of Medicaid, placing low-income folk under government-provided coverage. Most of the stuff people talk about concerns the individual coverage, which functions on a market system very different to single-payer healthcare systems. There are lots of details in this but these are the main ones:
1. It provides online insurance exchanges through which individual plans are purchased to increase competitiveness and ease of access. Obviously the 'ease of access' stuff didn't go too well at first.
2. It institutes new standards and regulations on insurance coverage, including preventing insurers from offering different prices or refusing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.
3. It provides incentives for uninsured people to get insurance by taxing people who don't. (The individual mandate.)
4. It decreases the cost of insurance for low income households through subsidies.
5. There are some new taxes on high income earners and the medical/insurance industries to help pay for it all.
People mostly like the law except for the individual mandate, but usually don't realise that it's necessary for all the parts they do like to work, or don't even know that those are part of Obamacare in the first place.
Rolling something like this out across a nation as large as the U.S.A is always gonna be met with a lot of differing views and more than its fair share of teething problems.
Thank you for your concise breakdown, very useful for me.
I was just surprised really when I'd looked at the poll that it was split right down the middle.
Not even a little. It's basically "We're going to skyrocket the prices of healthcare for young people so old people that are probably in a nursing home can afford it and force you to get it. And if you don't have healthcare we're going to fine the living shit out of you, even if it's because you can't afford it in the first place."
Lovely!! Obama done f*cked you guys good.
Are there no pros at all? Or are they so out weighed by how badly it's been implemented?
Sorry I know I can use google but an opinion from someone living day to day and having real life experience is nearly always gonna trump it for me.
Insurers used to get money by finding ways to not insure their customers. People were always denied coverage because they didn't cover "preexsisting conditions" even if they weren't. Also imagine a little girl needs hearing aids in both ears and insurance covers one and says the other not covered for "preexsisting"
Horrible
They aren't allowed to pull that anymore under this new care. It's also meant to try to give everyone atleast basic coverage.
From a public Heath perspective it's not that bad
Ah, see how it worked with the insurance companies still in place was where I was coming stuck, thank you for the clarification.
I understood a little how it used to work from Saw VI lol.
Don't even bother asking. No one is without bias so all you'll get is "it's amazing!" Or "it's hell spawned!". If you really care to know id look it up from something reputable.
Your role as a moderator enables you immediately ban this user from messaging (bypassing the report queue) if you select a punishment.
7 Day Ban
7 Day Ban
30 Day Ban
Permanent Ban
This site uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By clicking 'Accept', you agree to the policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
Accept
This site uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
close
Our policies have recently changed. By clicking 'Accept', you agree to the updated policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
Accept
Our policies have recently changed. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the updated policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.