And you seem more pessimistic than normal. Are you okay?
-
According to a McKinsey study, premiums rose 10% before the ACA and 6% in the following years. Ppl who shopped on the exchanges saved a lot. But most of the newly insured was through Medicaid expansion, not exchanges plus subsidies.
By the way, here is an articulated view on the problems with the ACA and why some voters might not love it: http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2018/11/what-neither-republicans-or-democrats.html?m=1 …
-
-
Could give bigger subsidies to the middle class but that would require increased tax revenue. In any case I don’t know how we can modify it without having the legislature.
-
Any method of expanding coverage was going to require healthy people to subsidize sick ppl, and require folks with more money to subsidize those with less money. Otherwise you just keep a system where the poor cannot afford insurance and the sick get rejected when they apply.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
My understanding of the problem is that lots of unsubsidized ppl were resentful of how plush Medicaid (a relatively austere public health program was) and that it was free.
-
Right but without subsidies and Medicaid expansion you can’t cover as many people. So...
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.