Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

nejm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 88 posts

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#11

Post by pessimizer »

spoiledtechie wrote: post #5

It's a wonderful idea. Free healthcare for all. Sadly, it simply isn't sustainable financially. I think in the next 10 years alone it was supposed to cost tax payers 10 trillion and that money can't literally be printed fast enough and the debt our country holds, extremely unsustainable. If they did it cheaper or more cost effective, I would say yes, but financially, you can't.

Entirely silly. Free healthcare is cheaper than what we have. If we could reduce the portion of GDP spent on healthcare to the level of what all other rich western countries have spent on their unsustainable universal healthcare for decades for better outcomes than what we have, we would be running surpluses.

Our crap healthcare is one of the biggest drains on the economy. What the US government spends on healthcare disregarding spending by individuals is still more per capita than any other universal health service.

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#12

Post by sjg007 »

spoiledtechie wrote: post #5

It's a wonderful idea. Free healthcare for all. Sadly, it simply isn't sustainable financially. I think in the next 10 years alone it was supposed to cost tax payers 10 trillion and that money can't literally be printed fast enough and the debt our country holds, extremely unsustainable. If they did it cheaper or more cost effective, I would say yes, but financially, you can't.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Multiple countries have single payer and good health outcomes. And it doesn't cost 10 trillion.

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#13

Post by WaylonKenning »

spoiledtechie wrote: post #5

It's a wonderful idea. Free healthcare for all. Sadly, it simply isn't sustainable financially. I think in the next 10 years alone it was supposed to cost tax payers 10 trillion and that money can't literally be printed fast enough and the debt our country holds, extremely unsustainable. If they did it cheaper or more cost effective, I would say yes, but financially, you can't.

It's not free healthcare for all. It's healthcare paid for the taxpayers, by the taxpayers.

And if the costs go up - it's because perhaps healthcare is better as a not-for-profit system rather than a for-profit system. Pretty hard to negotiate which hospital gives you the better deal when you're having a heart attack.

And I say this from a position of love in New Zealand - I wish you had normal government healthcare, like most other countries in the world. America spends 3x the amount on healthcare per capita compared to NZ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...).

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#16

Post by dghughes »

grzm wrote: post #9
jbigelow76 wrote: post #2

I doubt anyone in Congress or the White House working to repeal the ACA reads the New England Journal of Medicine.

It's a pretty prestigious journal. It's likely that aides to senators and representatives in key positions, as well as it being forwarded from interested constituents will make sure that the article makes the rounds. And it's generally good political practice to keep informed on the moves made by major players. Likely people in the White House know about it as well.

> It's a pretty prestigious journal...

It is but these days it can hard to know going by past reputation alone.

There seems to be a push by some sleazy publishers to buy prestigious medical journals and then take money to publish questionable studies.

Even the watchdogs who have tried to warn everyone have given up (or were forced to shut up).

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/website-tracking-so-called-pred...

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#17

Post by kchoudhu »

spoiledtechie wrote: post #5

It's a wonderful idea. Free healthcare for all. Sadly, it simply isn't sustainable financially. I think in the next 10 years alone it was supposed to cost tax payers 10 trillion and that money can't literally be printed fast enough and the debt our country holds, extremely unsustainable. If they did it cheaper or more cost effective, I would say yes, but financially, you can't.

Please point me to the non-partisan, non-hack, non-goldbug study that tells you that the US cannot support its current debt load. The feeding frenzy at every new treasury auction tells me that there's plenty of space yet for us to issue debt.

Serious claims require serious proof.

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#18

Post by grzm »

dghughes wrote: post #16
grzm wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pretty prestigious journal. It's likely that aides to senators and representatives in key positions, as well as it being forwarded from interested constituents will make sure that the article makes the rounds. And it's generally good political practice to keep informed on the moves made by major players. Likely people in the White House know about it as well.

> It's a pretty prestigious journal... It is but these days it can hard to know going by past reputation alone. There seems to be a push by some sleazy publishers to buy prestigious medical journals and then take money to publish questionable studies. Even the watchdogs who have tried to warn everyone have given up (or were forced to shut up). http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/website-tracking-so-called-pred...

While I appreciate the skepticism, and it is sad that there is an apparently increasing number of questionable journals out there, do you have any evidence that NEJM is one of them? They're currently run by the NEJM Group, which is controlled by the Massachusetts Medical Society.

http://www.massmed.org

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#19

Post by thomasthomas »

Thanks to the ACA, a larger share of Americans have health insurance than ever before

because its compulsory. this shouldn't an argument for the ACAs effectiveness. I have to buy car insurance if i choose to drive a car on public roads. i have to pay income tax if i have income. now, by birth, i automatically owe the state. i'd like my freedom and right to choose back please.

the fact this isn't the main argument from GOP shows their incompetence.

Re: Barack Obama Publishes Defense of the ACA in the New England Journal of Medicine

#20

Post by anigbrowl »

spoiledtechie wrote: post #5

It's a wonderful idea. Free healthcare for all. Sadly, it simply isn't sustainable financially. I think in the next 10 years alone it was supposed to cost tax payers 10 trillion and that money can't literally be printed fast enough and the debt our country holds, extremely unsustainable. If they did it cheaper or more cost effective, I would say yes, but financially, you can't.

Other countries manage it fine, and the costs here are overblown. Aetna claimed last year that it was pulling out of the ACA over costs, but it has emerged that this was a purely strategic decision after the FTC or the SEC declined to support a merger the firm wanted to enter into.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-aetna-...

I reject the claim that 'we just can't afford it', and claim instead that the economic loss of not doing it is far greater, just not properly accounted for.

Post reply on HN