Why not a single national market with 100% participation aka mandate + end of employer healthcare + end of Medicaid + subsidies?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Obamacare tried to balance this via a mandate, but a fractured insurance system makes that solution unstable. Some people will need more $$.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Special Interests (ahem, employers) will always get special treatment when it comes to health insurance.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, in particular the poor, the sick, and the eldelry (means-tested though for the latter).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is the definition of "insurance"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah, everyone with comfy employer-provided care won't want to change, even if this will give them agency and lower costs.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don't think they would be worse off. Employers would have to pass down existing insurance costs as one time pay raise
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sure, but by making costs transparent to everyone, pressure to get unit cost and spending down everywhere, rite?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Which is a huge problem imho for the economy as a whole. Facilitates the "complacent class" to reference
@tylercowenThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
All i am saying here is that transitional impact on those with employer HC could be mitigated.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.