Health Care changes

Another point which bothers me greatly. If the gov't screwed up the website this badly, how will they handle the actual health care and/or insurance issues?

Degaine wrote:

why does healthcare in the US cost 2 to 3 times per capita than in countries like France, Germany, or even Japan?

the ACA is a poor consolation prize to true healthcare reform and a single payer system, but it is a first step in the right direction.

Your question is excellent and I am only on this non-climbing forum thread to view the opinions of a general group that I respect. I don't have the answers, but I do throw out skeptical perspectives that I think are healthy in seeking the truth.

I do know that ACA has negatively affected too many of my personal friends and acquaintances.

On the second statement, if the country wants single payer, then why not just put it up for vote? Maybe single payer is the way to go, maybe not. Why do you think single payer has to sneak in trojan horse style?

Degaine wrote:
perspectives you throw out - yours or those of individuals like the Harvard professor - are woefully ignorant and uniformed.

In retrospect, given that almost no Republicans voted for the ACA, the Democrats might as well have voted for single payer. They should have also framed single payer as "Medicare for all". Medicare works, everybody nows what it is, it would have certainly received broad public support.

For example, cigarettes, alcohol, red meat, ice cream, whole milk and cream, full-fat anything, etc., etc., all should have taxes added to the base purchase price relative to the known health-risks these things represent.

There are too many rolling and coming catastrophes caused by ObamaCare to keep track of. Just wait until the employer market is hit late next year. But within a few weeks, a humanitarian crisis is about to hit millions who could find themselves without health insurance. Millions who had their insurance policies cancelled are now unable to re-insure themselves on the broken ObamaCare websites. In liberal Massachusetts alone, only 1% of those cancellations have re-enrolled.
The Boston Herald reports that ObamaCare and the president's broken promise have already cost 150,000 Bay Staters their health insurance plans. But of those 150,0000, only 549 are in the Massachusetts Health Connector to be re-enrolled on time. Even that small number are not officially enrolled.
Overall, only 47,781 total accounts have been created and a paltry 16,282 applications have been completed.
What you likely have here is a toxic mix of people who either can't access the state site due to the technical problems, or those who have decided not to re-enroll. There is still 32 days to sign up in time, but it is obvious many are in no hurry.
Most of the people in the White House, including the president, have never had any real experience outside of government or academia, so they probably didn’t know that betrayal and frustration combined with rate shock is no way to attract customers.
For those who are already ill or might get ill early next year, this is no laughing matter. How many of the millions who had their policies cancelled have scheduled surgery or chemotherapy in early January. And how many of those, through no fault of their own, won't be covered because they can't access the ObamaCare site or afford the ObamaCare-approved plan?
On top of that, if a large portion of the millions who had their insurance cancelled simply refuse to re-enroll, you can bet that those refusing will be the young and healthy needed to keep ObamaCare financially viable. The result of an insurance pool filled with the sick and elderly would be skyrocketing premiums; which means more healthy people drop out, which mean prices go even higher.
That is called the death spiral.
It is becoming more and more likely that by this time next year, ObamaCare could result in an increase in the number of Americans who are uninsured.

... IF the revenue to fund it came directly from lifestyle choices.

and what was/is the Republican healthcare plan?

What does it tell you, Curt, when single-payer can't even get the undivided support of Democrats in Congress?

Norton, in all fairness, as I recall the days when the bill was being formulated and subsequently passed, it was done in closed-door sessions wherein the GOP was specifically excluded. Over and over, I heard that info reported directly from on the scene interviews. I don't believe their input was wanted or permitted. Now those were more "naive" times with a less experienced president (than now is the case) wherein I believe he felt that "might ruled" i.e. "might makes right." As a result of what transpired subsequently, he may have mellowed somewhat and come to a greater realization that there is a need for both parties to work together. The Dems were pretty heady in those days with the notion that they were in charge and "others need not apply" so to speak.

the millions who had their policies cancelled

anybody have personal experience with this? Vs. 'millions' of anecdotal talking points?

even Medicare is a 12 month policy, for Christ's sakes