I think we can all agree that at least it’s good that Ms. Dunham didn’t sexually abuse the dog.

A lot. But it’s all in rubles.

A lot. But it’s all in rubles.

Russia joke...haha. Such biting political commentary on a site dedicated to providing insightful product reviews....errrr, I mean referral revenue.

Russia joke...haha. Such biting political commentary on a site dedicated to providing insightful product…

“Ghetto Latte” is racist. I expect some Gawker site to crank out a 1,000 word analysis of why you are a horrible person.

No idea what MAGA is, but I guess it’s bad. As for why people hate ACA, I think that your [mythical] 1% is more likely to not care much one way or the other. They are set for health care and for many of them [on my Facebook feed at least] are happy to pay the tax in order to show how moral they are.

Claiming it is a “public good” is not merely arguing semantics, it is distorting reality. If you’d like to see cash only services in practice, try: https://surgerycenterok.com/

If the government is paying for all healthcare, they are running it. That is true regardless of whether its a British national health type system or a Canadian system. The specifics might differ, but the result is that the government makes the ultimate decisions about what medical care is provided and how.

I’m hurt by your comment.

The opinion is based on seeing both first hand, and in many sources, the limitations and failings of nationalized medicine. But honestly, that discussion would require a rather large number of pixels. :)

I was replying to the comment that we should institute a single payer system. That would, I think most would agree, mean government running healthcare.

The estimates of lost coverage assume that under ACA the exchanges would continue to function. That is almost certainly not the case....and what we are discussing.

The risk corridor program wasn’t eliminated. Under it’s terms it paid out money for 2014, 2015 and 2016. It was designed to get insurance companies through the transition period while they figured out proper rates. The ACA provisions for it limited the payments to what had been paid in (it was designed as a form of…

I would disagree that government run healthcare would be better.

But it’s the same methodology that has led them to overestimate participation rates for the last 6 years. They haven’t changed their assumptions. They continue to believe young people will be coerced into signing up for health insurance (that doesn’t make strict economic sense) in order to avoid the tax penalty. …

Ok...She is a well informed and insightful expert on the subject. She is not a shill for either party and criticizes both (all) sides when she believes it is warranted. You prefer to get you health care law analysis from a Gawker staff writer?

Did read it. The CBO thinks the penalty (aka, tax) will get younger people to buy into the exchanges. But that hasn’t happened. The CBO has been wrong about it every year since Obamacare passed. There is no reason to think it will suddenly change. That’s especially true given the uncertainty as to whether the IRS…

Insightful. Thanks.

First, the CBO has been consistently wrong about exchange utilization rates. They have repeatedly overestimated the number of people who will use them. They have had to revise their numbers down every year.

Shouldn’t we also be asking what will happen even without any changes? The exchanges are collapsing due to the obvious (and predicted) death spiral. The only way to save them is either a massive increase in subsidies and/or a huge increase in the fine (ie, Justice Roberts’ “tax”) for not having insurance. Neither…

Might be able to fix the pops with a few sprays of contact cleaner.