RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

writing for godot

You Should Know: Health Care And Health Insurance Are Not The Same!

Written by lauragalet22   
Monday, 13 November 2017 00:06

Of the many things that the Obama administration will be remembered for, one clear standout is the ObamaCare. As Democrats would affectionately say, elections have consequences, one stark example of the 2016 elections is the now-threatened Affordable Care Act. It was affordable and patient-centered until the entry of big insurance companies that made it expensive and profit centered.

At the moment, politicians from either side of the divide seem not to relent on the upsetting disconnect from their stands to Health Care reforms. One debate after another, all focused on changing Health Care, yet no single overhaul seems to emphasize on lowering the cost of Health Care itself. It is surprisingly underemphasized or sometimes absent from the deliberations altogether, despite being a vital avenue to access to cheaper quality healthcare and lower insurance premiums.


There were an estimated 20 million people registered under Obamacare, and it was stated that they were to retain their benefits and everything in it. Also, kids under the age of 26 were to remain on their parents’ insurance covers. Right now, though, it is becoming increasingly becoming a case of Republicans in Congress equating health insurance with health care and Democrats rejecting the enactments.

They are collectively and wrongly focused on increasing the number of Americans with health insurance, instead of making health care affordable and patient-centered. Their major disregard that is health insurance premiums is by portraying it as a lesser manifestation of such factors as the cost of medical care and the insurance environment.

Through an ill-advised attempt to insure as many Americans as possible, ACA (ObamaCare) doles out as much as $1 trillion needed to reduce premiums and other extra regulations and taxes. Yet many of them counterproductively increase the same premiums. At this state, however, it should be unwise to debate how detrimental the approach can be.

Health Insurance

It is still baffling, though, that both the Senate and Congress majorly controlled by the Republicans are striving to make insurance “more affordable” by using refundable tax credits. Admittedly, even such a move when they are ignoring the leading cause is futile. It shields medical care providers from competing on price disparities.

For people who can’t afford routine health care, the solution becomes public subsidy given that it is essential for everyone to access quality health care, not insurance. That is to say, the success or failure of ACA or any other alternative Republicans will come up with will be measured based on the quality of services it offers.

Lowering the cost is troubled with peril, and it should only be reasonable if it doesn’t harm patients. It must not jeopardize quality, restrict access or inhibit crucial innovation of medical care in the US.

The first step is to create a conducive environment for consumers where they don’t worry about prices and only receive benefits that have value. This is even more reasonable when a person has an emergency issue that knows no price consideration and just needs quality medical assistance.

We may laud ObamaCare as a success in increasing the number of people with insurance covers, but it is worth noting that it discouraged the emergence of a competitive environment. Had it done it, the quality of services would have automatically increased while lowering the costs.

Now, that is the point that makes these two different – the degree to which ACA has benefited those who couldn’t access health care before. If only what Republicans are proposing will maintain the subsidies, then it will be a great alternative. However, if its mandate is repealed, a considerable portion of ObamaCare subsidies will no longer be paid by the rising premiums remunerated by the young, healthy and wealthy Americans.

Continuation of the subsidies will undoubtedly require Congress or taxpayers, to cater for the whole cost of subsidized health care. The primary goal of health reform should be to cut the costs of medical care. If it increases the number of insurance policyholders, then it isn’t worth accepting.

If Health Insurance, then let it be worth it!

Health insurance can be a lifesaver, especially when the need for antiretroviral medication or drugs Essential Oils For Skin. But unfortunately, it won’t stop a person from living in a poor neighborhood. It won’t improve the cost of living in the area in any way!

Of course, with everything being equal, more insurance coverage than right now is better. But as the society that abides by the law, it would still make sense, even more, when the benefits justify the costs. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

0 # Depressionborn 2017-11-15 05:48
nocare noboma care?
According to the most recent IRS reports, 23.2 million tax filers paid the fine, obtained an exception, or simply ignored the individual mandate.
0 # universlman 2017-11-15 16:34
If as you say, "The primary goal of health reform should be to cut the costs of medical care" then it is no surprise that our healthcare has such poor outcomes.

The primary goal of health reform should be to provide health care period. The costs are best controlled through a national system. Until that happens - profits will come when service is withheld.
0 # MikeAF48 2017-11-15 17:42
The Affordable Care Act/Tax cut, cut, cut Act. Lets just call it the Mulligan Stew Act/Bill throw it in a kettle mix it all up, hand pick the best parts for the wealthy be sure to get enough broth. Tax benefits for the middle class (not sure what a middle class is in this environment) so we know what to expect. Finally what's left in the bottom of the pot is slim pickens. Millions of people fined for not having health care the masses that have health care get the bill. And finally freeze the left overs, nothing gets throwen out. AIN'T THAT AMERICA.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.