ACA repeal could cost California more than 200,000 jobs
sciencebulletin.org
sciencebulletin.org
Democrats will have a supermajority in California come January. It will be interesting to see what happens.
The only reason I'm against "repeal and replace" is because I expect the end result will be worse than the ACA. The system is fundamentally broken, but still getting stuff done. In the way that many major software projects are. If the Congress was willing to write their own code instead of outsourcing it to lobbyists, I might be a little more confident in the results.
Something that gives 'essentially universal coverage' - sure. But single payer, no way.
'Single payer' often means that Steve Jobs waits 12 months for his knee replacement, in behind a lot of unemployed folks, immigrants, many undocumented migrants etc. which is the objective of socialized medicine.
In Canada, it's illegal to pay a doctor to fix you. Granted, we're the only country where this is the case.
I could be wrong, but a UK friend indicated that if you 'go outside the NHS' then you have to basically stay outside of it.
The 'real challenge' is to try to find the right balance and make it fair, but still allow people to have choice etc..
Probably for 2/3rds of people, 'single payer' is best, but for a not-insignificant-minority it's definitely not.
It's tricky because I'm not sure anyone in the world has the solution.
So the approach would be to extend Medicare to everyone (or in our case, MediCal). Increase payroll taxes to pay for it; remove the requirement that employers provide health insurance. All other laws remain the same.
But that won't work, it will blow up healthcare.
Why?
Because young people just won't buy coverage. They'll all just use Medicare. :)
Most people will = destruction of the industry.
So, yes, 'getting everyone covered somehow by nudging in Medicare' sure ... but it can't just be done by simply extending it.
"The majority (135,000) of these lost jobs would be in the healthcare industry, including at hospitals, doctor offices, labs, outpatient and ambulatory care centers, nursing homes, dentist offices, other healthcare settings, and insurers. But jobs would also be lost in other industries. Suppliers of the healthcare industry, such as food service, janitorial, and accounting firms, would experience reduced demand, leading to job loss. The lost jobs also include those lost due to the “induced effect” of healthcare workers spending less at restaurants, retail stores, and other local businesses."
Yes, I see we know where they work but not what they do.
Maybe apart from the ER staff. They'll get more people who didn't handle simple problems early. (Or couldn't afford to)
Is there any reason to assume it? It's not like people didn't get care before the ACA - they used Medicaid or went to the ER. We were told the ACA would make things more efficient as people would be able to use primary care instead of ERs for non-emergency problems.
And yet somehow we have 200k extra jobs. That's not a sign of efficiency.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-st...
We need 200K jobs in California to run the ACA? I live in a town with a population of about 40,000 people. It takes five towns like mine to run this abomination?
Good riddance. On all fronts.
Please.
The part you might not see is what Obamacare has done and is doing to the medical industry, from providers on up.
Beyond the fact that we have personally gotten royally screwed by Obamacare, my wife is a doctor and I see and hear everything that's going on. Only one way to put it:
Carnage.
Doctors are quitting. Care is horrible or compromised due to forced cost reductions. Some patients are not seen because they are not worth the effort or the doctors are not going to get paid enough, etc.
Having more people who can be claimed to have insurance isn't a good metric at all. You have to look at what they have and how much it is costing.
Most of people who now have insurance thanks to Obamacare have no clue that they've signed a deal with the devil. What I mean by this is that they have, effectively, signed-over their estate to the government. They are LIABLE for every dollar spent in their care from now until eternity.
Yup. Forget about leaving the family home to your kids. If you get sick and need care the government will own your home and your kids might get nothing after you pass.
This is because they've been shoved into Medicaid and that means the government has to, by law, recover all costs and this means they got their hooks into your estate.
They can even file liens on your home to pay for your care.
Bullshit?
OK, how about we get the truth from the horse's mouth:
https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/eligibility/estate-recover...
What do you think about Obamacare now? And how about those bullshit 200K workers? Their salaries surely will be added in some form to the money owed by these poor saps who are shoved into Medicaid and now have "insurance".
Obamacare might easily be the largest theft of personal property by a government in the history of humanity. And I don't think I am exaggerating here. I think there are over twenty million people on Medicaid. Every single one of the estates could be in danger of being sold off by the government to pay for medical care.
This is truly revolting. Yet all of these Obama/Obamacare supporters are so ignorant of the facts that they actually think he did a good thing for the country and that Obamacare has helped poor people. Unbelievable.
There are also more people with new private insurance coverage in CA than new Medicaid recipients, so that part of your rant is also false.
How about nationwide?
Also, could you provide a link to verify what you are claiming will start on January 1st?
Please don't try to put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. The personal estate grab by the government is without precedent.
And, for what? The care people get at the kinds of plans that shove you into Medicaid isn't anything to boast about.
Obamacare is a disaster. Thankfully the new administration seems poised to tackle this head-on. I hope they do a good job while still providing for a reasonable path to healthcare for those who have financial limitations.
It is society's obligation to help them. Yet the way this happens can't take a form that makes it insanely worst for the rest of us and, at the same time, has the government make a grab for people's estates. This is just wrong whether it happens in one state or all of them.
Here http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/06/27/californias-seizure-of... is info about the change to California's laws on estate recovery. They now recover the minimum allowed by federal law.
Obamacare is a complete farce on many points.
First, it claims million of people who didn't have insurance are now insured. The truth is they were shoved into Medicaid.
Second, this is NOT health insurance! This is you incurring a debt with the State and one they are obligated by law to collect on by grabbing your estate.
Third, NOBODY is forewarned when they sign on the dotted line that the family home and their entire estate is at risk of being appropriated by the government and that nothing whatsoever might remain for the kids to inherit.
Given healthcare costs it isn't too much of a stretch to conclude that getting sick with anything that requires hospitalization, surgery or extended care will result in a bill so large that most people's estates will be depleted before heirs can see a dime of inheritance.
To me this is sick underhanded government robbery. If a private enterprise swindled people into contracts with such consequences people would end-up in jail. Yet in government you can do this, you can lie, cheat and steal from people and suffer no consequences whatsoever.
This is way past wrong.
First, millions of people who didn't have health insurance now do. Not Medicaid, private insurance. There are also millions of new Medicaid recipients.
Second, most of the Medicaid coverage is not debt. Only coverage of one specific thing is debt; all the other coverage is not taken from the estate.
My god, 200,000 jobs in CA alone?! It's worst than I thought. That's 200,000 people who are not only costing the economy, but aren't contributing to the economy themselves.