read the original topic and give commons of these two discussion, do you agree or disagree

Topic:
In recent weeks, it is almost impossible to go through a day and not read something (pro or con) about the Affordable Health Care Act (aka Obamacare). A few days ago, President Obama held a press conference on the topic. Opinions on both sides are numerous and pointed about the benefits and costs of the law. I have attached a link to a Washington Post 11/16 blog that discusses President Obama’s claim that Obamacare has helped to significantly reduce the cost of health care. What are your opinions about the legislation? Do you think it will result in overall cost reductions in U.S. health care expenditures or will it add costs to an already expensive system?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/11/15/president-obamas-claim-that-obamacare-has-helped-hold-down-health-care-costs/

I have also included a link from a November 15 CNN report that President Obama’s decision to allow people to keep previously canceled plans could add millions to government costs. Please feel free to include this issue or any other facet of this complex and controversial public policy issue in your discussion and analysis.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/15/politics/obamacare-fix-costs/

discussion 1. One of the reasons why health care in the United States is so expensive is the irreversible change in the Americans lifestyles over the past 60 years. People spend more time in cars than on foot, more time playing video games than outdoor sports, and more reliance on medicines than healthy living habits. As a result, people’s spending on health has doubled in 60 years, accounting for 20% of GDP.

Obama’s initial wish was to reduce total health care spending by increasing the number of people participating in the health insurance program. But contrary to expectations, the total expenditure on health insurance has increased year by year. In fact, the bill was designed inappropriately, no matter from any aspect of the measurement of its objectives are difficult to achieve.

The most controversial part is the compulsory personal insurance law. The core is that all Americans must buy health insurance, or pay tax fines, so as to solve the current problem that many young people and healthy people choose not to pay for health insurance, while the elderly and infirm patients are ineligible or unable to afford it. Another law is that private insurance companies cannot refuse to insure people with illness, and low-income people will receive government subsidies. The reason is simple: let young and healthy people join the insurance with the elderly and infirm people, increase the size of the capital reserve, so as to ensure that private insurance companies have reasonable profitability, without significantly increasing the premiums of the elderly and the chronic disease group.

In the health insurance industry, research shows that people over 64 years old spend six times as much on health care as people under 21. However, the current health insurance premium structure does not reflect the risk difference between the two groups. This alone is enough to discourage the enthusiasm of young healthy people to insure, while indirectly encouraging the elderly and infirm to rely more on medical insurance than to maintain health by actively improving their personal habits, such as diet and exercise (Butler, 2016) .

discussion2. Obama had already proposed his own medical reform plan before 2013 and caused a lot of controversies. The core of the bill is to create a medical insurance market regulated by the federal government. The sale of medical insurance is done by a public insurance agency established by the government. The bill requires the vast majority of Americans to purchase health insurance, and those who cannot afford insurance can get federal funding. Larger companies or companies must provide health insurance for their employees or they will be fined. The federal government can provide financial assistance to small companies or small businesses that purchase employee health insurance. The bill prohibits the insurance industry from refusing to sell insurance to its purchaser on the basis of its previous medical history and does not impose premiums on the grounds of gender or medical history.

The Obama administration has always believed that the rising trend of medical expenses and the structural defects of the medical system may not be reversed in the short term; while the socially disadvantaged groups lacking medical insurance are increasing year by year, it is an urgent need to solve the livelihood problem. During the five years of the implementation of the Affordable Health Care Act, the number of uninsured people fell from nearly 50 million in 2011 to 32.3 million in early 2015, and the percentage of the total population also fell from 15.7% in early 2011 to 9.2% in the third quarter of 2015. However, although the Affordable Care Act has effectively improved the coverage of medical insurance, it has not eliminated the root causes of the problem. On the surface, medical insurance is indeed more “affordable” for ordinary people, but this is not the result of the reduction in actual medical costs, but the government’s involvement in sharing the public health care expenses. Therefore, Obama’s medical reform is a policy of “treating the symptoms and not treating the root cause”. Although it can alleviate the medical burden of the people in the short term, it does not solve the systemic problems such as the rapid increase in medical expenses and excessive use of medical services. In addition, because the Obamacare reform program used administrative means to intervene in the medical insurance market, it caused the rigidity and disorder of the insurance market, causing insurance companies to suffer huge losses.

ORDER NOW

Open chat