Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (21) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, 5 months ago

    I watched President Obama giving a speech in October 2013. He brought out two young ladies who had serious medical conditions, conditions they had not been able to have treated, and said the ACA would allow them access to the best healthcare in the world for less than $100 a month total out-of-pocket cost, a cost they could easily afford.


    Some opponents of the ACA said Obama was lying, and that the ACA would have premiums that most could not afford, but the official number for the ACA is an average premium of just $82 a month, proving that Obama was telling the TRVTH in his October speech.


    But that $82 is only with the Federal subsidy, and the Appeals Court for the District of Colombia ruled that the subsidy is illegal for many states, and without the subsidy, the average monthly premium for the ACA rises to $346. However, the Appeals Court for the Fourth Circuit ruled that the subsidy WAS legal, so the Case of the Subsidy is going to the Supreme Court.


    So those who must use the ACA can take their briefs off until the Supreme Court decides.

  2. Mr. MOR

    Mr. MOR said, 5 months ago

    @Michael wme
    Just wanted to say thanks for providing links that actually go to articles that are, themselves, both informative and also linked to their own source material.

  3. Doughfoot

    Doughfoot said, 5 months ago

    In states that created their own marketplaces for health insurance, the subsidies are not a problem. The only people who would be denied the subsidies that would enable them to have health insurance are those who live in states which refused to create their own marketplaces. Just like those people who are still ineligible for medicaid because their states refused to expand medicaid.
    In short, the refusal of many states to step up to the plate is going to kill a whole lot of their citizens, and may kill a lot more if this ruling stands, as it demonstrable that those who do not have health insurance suffer and die at much higher rates than those who do have it.

    But what do GOP politicians care about that? We are not talking about people likely to vote GOP, so they don’t really matter. “If they would rather die, they had better do it, and reduce the surplus population.” That really what the poor and unemployed are to the GOP, “the surplus population.”

  4. magicwalnut

    magicwalnut GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    Doughfoot: The GOP will start caring when their tax base disappears…

  5. ARodney

    ARodney said, 5 months ago

    I’m fortunate to live in a blue state, where the government is not actively campaigning AGAINST my health, well-being, finances, and freedom. The ruling would only affect me if it manages to ruin the huge gains that the ACA has made in lowering insurance costs nationwide. But it’s unlikely to stand, since it was based on naked partisanship and no actual legal grounds.

  6. ODon

    ODon said, 5 months ago

    @ARodney

    “But it’s unlikely to stand, since it was based on naked partisanship and no actual legal grounds.”
    Thankfully if it goes to the Supreme Court we need no longer fear naked partisanship….oops.

  7. Gary Kleppe

    Gary Kleppe said, 5 months ago

    It would be much simpler to eliminate private insurance and make health care a public service. Extend Medicare, which no court has a problem with, to cover in full all medically necessary services for everyone in the country.

  8. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, 5 months ago

    @Gary Kleppe

    Hear, hear.

  9. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 said, 5 months ago

    @Gary Kleppe

    We could tell the Private Insurance companies they would have to be non-profit. Japan does that and they still fight to get people to sign up. The opposite of what happens here.
    -
    The U.S. ranks worst among 11 wealthy nations in terms of “efficiency, equity and outcomes" despite having the world’s most expensive health care system

  10. Gary Kleppe

    Gary Kleppe said, 5 months ago

    @Ruff

    We could keep private insurers, but what would be the point? They increase costs and add nothing of value to the system. And I really hope that last paragraph is facetious.

  11. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, 5 months ago

    @Gary Kleppe

    The problem with that is that there’s a contingent in this country who believe that money should be the gauge of the worth of everything- up to, including and especially human life. They like that the “free market” lets the poor suffer and coddles the rich, because that’s how they think the world should be; any system that treats everyone the same is met with their scorn.

  12. TripleAxel

    TripleAxel said, 5 months ago

    @The Wolf In Your Midst

    Human life would be measured against money in a government-funded health care system as well. The difference is that unaccountable bureaucrats, not the affected individuals, would decide how much money to spend, and there would be less incentive by the health care providers to improve and increase their services.

  13. Gary Kleppe

    Gary Kleppe said, 5 months ago

    @TripleAxel

    No, actually, unaccountable bureaucrats are running the insurance companies now. Ever manage to get a claim refusal overruled? Me neither. And since health care providers get paid per procedure, all the incentives are to do more procedures, not to improve quality. A universal system could be designed so that decisions about care are made by doctors. This isn’t just speculation. It works this way already in countries that have done it.

  14. wbr

    wbr said, 5 months ago

    Ever manage to get a claim refusal overruled? yes but it was a private insurer if it was gov no way // i guess gary kleppe likes va health care

  15. Gary Kleppe

    Gary Kleppe said, 5 months ago

    @wbr

    The VA does the best they can despite being massively underfunded. Republicans in Congress love to blow money on more and more wars and swear up and down that they love and support the troops but they’re not too keen on paying to take care of those troops after they’re used up.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (6).