Premiums and copays are not tripling in group health insurance thru the employer. They are in some Obamacare markets. Why is that? I have already explained that. The two structures that were designed to keep premiums from increasing year after year have been removed. No structure that would have kept costs from exploding was ever created.
We have never had prices that are transparent. No, we haven't.But it's high time to start, don't you think? Or that example with some doctors in Okla is not happening in every state. But it should! No one in Congress is discussing about making that become a reality. But they should! There has been some talk about allowing health insurance companies sell policies across state lines on the Obamacare exchanges.
I don't think it's reasonable that the premium for a health insurance policy take up more than 8% of your income check. It will without the government subsidies or the risk corridor program. Good grief! When will you give the risk corridor red herring a rest? Obamacare has unique problems that employer based insurance does not have even though price transparancy is not a reality across the United States.
The Federal Gov needs to pay the subsidies or bring back the risk corridor program so that five million people won't lose their health insurance coverage. 
Originally Posted by adav8s28
Support for a risk corridor program of the type envisaged by early Obamacare advocates is just another example of the multiple elements of sleight-of-hand necessary to make it look like Obamacare is "working." Again, the lack of a risk corridor structure is
not why this whole thing is such a fiscal fiasco. Anyone wishing to attain even the most rudimentary understanding of the issue needs to realize that.
Obama did as Democrats like to do and threw more money at the problem with the ACA. And while that helped a certain segment of the population, it did nothing about out of control costs and poor healthcare outcomes.
Originally Posted by Tiny
Yes, indeed! As currently constituted, Obamacare will not "work" and cannot "work" unless large quantities of taxpayer dollars are poured into it. Remember when Obama claimed that the ACA would "bend the cost curve" downward? Well, of course, it did the opposite -- big time!
If Trump can spend 400 million to redesign a ballroom, why can't the Government find the money for the subsidies at least for one more year. 
Originally Posted by adav8s28
Maybe because there's a big difference between building a monument to a president's ego with $400 million of private money from contributors, and pouring hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into a huge fiscal fiasco? I'll agree with you on one thing, though -- I think congress should go ahead, bite the bullet, and extend the subsidies for one year, especially inasmuch as failing to do so would be political suicide. But then they should work feverishly to tear up the whole thing and start over, addressing all the problems to which we alluded earlier. The fiasco that answers to the name of the "Affordable Care Act" (a misnomer if there ever was one!) is perhaps an even bigger national embarrassment than our mind-numbingly byzantine tax code.
There has to be a solution that both sides can agree on...
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
One would think!
Color me uber-cynical, but my take on the issue is that when push comes to shove, far too many congresspersons (on both sides of the aisle) enjoy their campaign contributions far too much to do any more than pay lip service to the issue.
So we see lots of caterwauling, but no one makes a serious attempt to do a damned thing.
When Bush43 was president only 80% of the population had some type of health insurance coverage.
