Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 whembly wrote:

Just stop. Not what I said.

What did you say? Because my experience invalidates your statement.

Also, East St. Louis.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Just stop. Not what I said.

What did you say? Because my experience invalidates your statement.

When you moved to MN, did you retain your license and state plates?

That means you have to go back to IL to relicense/reissue plates... right?

You asked what if I move?

I simply said 'reapply' for insurance.

You seem to have a problem with this...

Also, East St. Louis.

And? That's IL.

 whembly wrote:
Sure you can. No need to have the exchange... just let the various insurance co. compete for your business.

The exchanges are just a means to make competition more open and transparent.

That's. Happening. Now.

Yes, now think it through. If the current low rate of penalty is enough to encourage people to delay insurance until they are sick, how much worse would the issue be if there was no penalty at all?

Death Spiral has begun Seb. It'll be accelerated when the Cadillac Tax kicks in.

I'm gonna mark that down as officially the 1,203rd time someone on dakka has declared the death spiral is happening.

Sure. Then, make the baseline requirements really cheap.

Like, basic Primary Care visits + Catestrophic coverage.

The current baseline requirements are low. If you think that lowering them further could improve the system then that's cool. What you should do then is write a letter to your Republican congress critters to work with Democrats in refining ACA.

I want single payer... not NHS.

As dogma pointed out...

Yup. And the critics are proven right so far...

They've been wrong about everything so far. They claimed enrollments wouldn't hit the targets. When enrollment figures looked strong they started claiming that only old and sick people were signing up, they claimed it was the start of the death spiral. When the demographics came in and showed no death spiral, they moved on to the 'enrolled but not paid' thing. When that was wrong they moved on to the 'but how many people have lost coverage thing'. When the answer to that turned out to be none, they went back to the death spiral. And all along, every single year they've been playing this ridiculous game of making a big deal about the high original estimates for premium hikes, but then going silent when the actual premium increases are much lower.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Because it's a GAK.LAW. Not because it was pushed by Obama.

I remember when you were adamant that ACA was terrible, partisan politics because only Democrats voted for it, and every Republican voted against it.

But now when every single governor or legislature that's rejected medicaid expansion is Republican... somehow that isn't evidence of partisanship.

 whembly wrote:

When you moved to MN, did you retain your license and state plates?

Yes. I retained both.

 whembly wrote:

That means you have to go back to IL to relicense/reissue plates... right?

No.

 whembly wrote:

Also, East St. Louis. And? That's IL.

Yeah, that's the point. People regularly commute from East St. Louis to St. Louis; crossing State lines. Their licenses are recognized.

 sebster wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Sure you can. No need to have the exchange... just let the various insurance co. compete for your business.

The exchanges are just a means to make competition more open and transparent.

Not really. Each state's exchange are losing Insurance participants.

Your transparency claims is weird and I'm not sure what you are referring to.... care to elaborate?

That's. Happening. Now.

Yes, now think it through. If the current low rate of penalty is enough to encourage people to delay insurance until they are sick, how much worse would the issue be if there was no penalty at all?

The insurance law/regulations are drastically different Pre/Post Obamacare Seb.vv

The Dems could've simply targeting those uninsured to get some coverage. But, no... they had to drop this mess that affects EVERYONE now.

Death Spiral has begun Seb. It'll be accelerated when the Cadillac Tax kicks in.

I'm gonna mark that down as officially the 1,203rd time someone on dakka has declared the death spiral is happening.

Tell that to the states where Aetna, UnitedHealth, Humana, etc are dropping out.

Sure. Then, make the baseline requirements really cheap.

Like, basic Primary Care visits + Catestrophic coverage.

The current baseline requirements are low.

They are not low Seb... unless you don't know what I meant by "catastrophic coverage"?

you think that lowering them further could improve the system then that's cool. What you should do then is write a letter to your Republican congress critters to work with Democrats in refining ACA.

I've written/emailed them that I support a REPEAL, and donated accordingly. This system needs massive overhaul... it'd be much simply to repeal and start over.

I want single payer... not NHS.

As dogma pointed out...

I mean I want the Canadian model over the NHS.

Yup. And the critics are proven right so far...

They've been wrong about everything so far. They claimed enrollments wouldn't hit the targets. When enrollment figures looked strong they started claiming that only old and sick people were signing up, they claimed it was the start of the death spiral. When the demographics came in and showed no death spiral, they moved on to the 'enrolled but not paid' thing. When that was wrong they moved on to the 'but how many people have lost coverage thing'. When the answer to that turned out to be none, they went back to the death spiral. And all along, every single year they've been playing this ridiculous game of making a big deal about the high original estimates for premium hikes, but then going silent when the actual premium increases are much lower.

They counted the Medicaid enrollment as "Obamacare" enrollment which was very misleading.

The premiums (the monthly pmt) AND the deductables (the amt you have to pay before insurance kicks in) have been RISING. It's been held in check a bit, because the rate increases have to be approved. Now, imagine what happens when a state exchanges only as two players (or god forbid ONE)... the next rate increases will likely be approved at the insurance's request simply due to the fact that the state doesn't want that insurance company to leave.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Because it's a GAK.LAW. Not because it was pushed by Obama.

I remember when you were adamant that ACA was terrible, partisan politics because only Democrats voted for it, and every Republican voted against it.

Because that's politics. The Federal Congressional Critters don't give a gak as to the impact on State's budgets.

But now when every single governor or legislature that's rejected medicaid expansion is Republican... somehow that isn't evidence of partisanship.

I think I mentioned previously that yes, its partisanship but may also happen to be pragmatic. These states didn't want to adjust their budgets to support the increase cost by shaving other things or raising taxes.

 whembly wrote:
Your transparency claims is weird and I'm not sure what you are referring to.... care to elaborate?

Pre-exchange people had to shop around to multiple insurers, who were each offering programs with very different structures, and those structures were generally written to be opaque so that people couldn't actually figure out which deal would be best for them. The exchanges require standardisation of programs and enable much easier comparison.

The Dems could've simply targeting those uninsured to get some coverage. But, no... they had to drop this mess that affects EVERYONE now.

Explain the 'simple' targeting that would have ensured coverage for people not covered through work and unable to afford the old individual schemes. And then explain the 'simple' targeting that could have ensured people with pre-existing conditions could get treatment.

Tell that to the states where Aetna, UnitedHealth, Humana, etc are dropping out.

That's not even what the death spiral is. The death spiral is when healthy people drop out, pushing up premiums, forcing out more healthy people and so on until only the sick are paying in to cover the sick.

They are not low Seb... unless you don't know what I meant by "catastrophic coverage"?

We have insurance here, you know.

I've written/emailed them that I support a REPEAL, and donated accordingly. This system needs massive overhaul... it'd be much simply to repeal and start over.

So you don't support 'simply lowering the requirements' and have contacted your congress critters to that effect. No wonder the Republicans in congress are showing no interest in improving the system for Americans.

I mean I want the Canadian model over the NHS.

So public payer, private provider. It's fine, though more expensive. Anything is an improvement over the US system. Really the thing that needs to be pulled out of the US system is employer provided coverage. But that's a sacred cow...

They counted the Medicaid enrollment as "Obamacare" enrollment which was very misleading.

The non-medicaid enrollments also exceeded targets. Are we really doing this again?

The premiums (the monthly pmt) AND the deductables (the amt you have to pay before insurance kicks in) have been RISING.

Of course payments have been rising. Payments for healthcare are going up everywhere. It's one of the absolute constants of the developed world. I agree that in places where we may end up with a single insurer then competition is lost and there's a real problem. Reforms are needed to stop the decline in competition, they could look at conditioning access to those profitable medicare contracts on having exchange listed products for instance.

Because that's politics. The Federal Congressional Critters don't give a gak as to the impact on State's budgets.

And it seems many states with Republican governors don't give a gak about any residents with low incomes and no healthcare. Or at least, they don't give enough of a gak to accept pay 20% of the cost of covering those people.

I think I mentioned previously that yes, its partisanship but may also happen to be pragmatic. These states didn't want to adjust their budgets to support the increase cost by shaving other things or raising taxes.

And just maybe the ACA was passed because almost every Democrats really believed in it, and every single Republican thought it was very terrible. Or maybe it was overtly partisan politics.

 whembly wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

I want single payer... not NHS.

NHS is single payer.

As far as I know, NHS also includes the providers, whom are government operated.

The Canadian model, most providers are still privately operated and competes for those block grants from Canada Medicare.

About 75% of providers are private institutions. Having lots of area with low rural population necessitates subsidizing help from the provincial governments. And while general services are available through public funds, the cost of prescription drugs must still be covered by the individual. Most good jobs will provide you comprehensive insurance coverage, many including dental.

There is generaly no issues with inter-provincial travel. I have been charged for general services outside of Quebec only once, in Alberta, and the nurse told me that it was apparently only ever problematic between Alberta and Quebec. All other provinces basically bill themselves without issues. Really, the only negative here is that letting your health insurance card expire is viewed by everyone as the sign that you are secretly Hitler.

I guess if I had to choose between Health and Defense, I would choose Health. In the order of things, that seems to me to be the urgent rather than the important. Perspective, I guess.


Edit : and suddenly, I'm in the US.

According to the Minnesota DMV you must register your vehicle in MN within 60 days of becoming a resident.

https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/dvs/Pages/dvs-content-detail.aspx?pageID=571&pageTitle=Tabs-Vehicle%20Registration%20-%20General%20-%20New%20Resident

Same for a driver's license: https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/dvs/Pages/new-to-minnesota.aspx

I guess you can choose not to do so, but that is not what their laws say you should do.



I'm pretty sure this is what Whembly was referring to.

 CptJake wrote:

If you have a valid driver’s license from another U.S. state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Virgin Islands, Guam, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Northern Mariana or Canada you must pass a knowledge test about Minnesota driving laws and regulations.

I never had to do that, I guess it has changed? It is weird that States do not recognize identification from other States or the Federal Government.