At Least Six Swing States Face Double-Digit Premium Hikes under Obamacare Which...CONSERVATIVES forecast

Conservatives and Republicans forecast that this would be the result of Obamacare. Already we are proven RIGHT...AGAIN.


At Six Swing States Face Double-Digit Premium Hikes under Obamacare

by ALEX SWOYER16 Aug 2016 Washington, DC

Double-digit Obamacare premium hikes projected in 2017 may bode in Donald Trump’s favor, as several swing states are being impacted by double-digit increases under the law and consumers are expected to see the hikes around Nov. 1 — one week before heading to the polls.

Trump has promised to repeal and replace Obamacare, but Hillary Clinton has vowed to make the Obamacare exchanges work. Some say the way she would do that is through raising taxes.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/16/least-six-swing-states-face-double-digit-premium-hikes-obamacare/

Once again Progressives are silent.

When undeniable FACTS are posted, they have nothing to say.

Obamacare is going down the tubes, Progressives cannot deny the fact so, like good kids they are silent.

So what else is new?   When I was in the private health insurance market,  before Obamacare existed, I swallowed close to 20% rate hikes virtually every year.  The big difference was that I was absolutely stuck with my insurer -- there was simply no competition or rate shopping possible -- as no one else would take me after my breast cancer diagnosis.

I don't know what the answer is, but clearly we haven't found it yet.  Certainly returning to the prior 'free market' system is no answer at all.

RealLindaL wrote:So what else is new?   When I was in the private health insurance market,  before Obamacare existed, I swallowed close to 20% rate hikes virtually every year.  The big difference was that I was absolutely stuck with my insurer -- there was simply no competition or rate shopping possible -- as no one else would take me after my breast cancer diagnosis.

I don't know what the answer is, but clearly we haven't found it yet.  Certainly returning to the prior 'free market' system is no answer at all.

There was never anything close to a free market in health insurance. Not from its inception as union risk pools... to the influence bought in Congress to limit real competition with rules and laws benefiting the large players.... right down to refusing to let companies into multiple states. That's central planning.

PkrBum wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:So what else is new?   When I was in the private health insurance market,  before Obamacare existed, I swallowed close to 20% rate hikes virtually every year.  The big difference was that I was absolutely stuck with my insurer -- there was simply no competition or rate shopping possible -- as no one else would take me after my breast cancer diagnosis.

I don't know what the answer is, but clearly we haven't found it yet.  Certainly returning to the prior 'free market' system is no answer at all.

There was never anything close to a free market in health insurance.  Not from its inception as union risk pools... to the influence bought in Congress to limit real competition with rules and laws benefiting the large players.... right down to refusing to let companies into multiple states. That's central planning.

Perhaps "free market" was not the correct term...but surely you're not suggesting that with absolutely no oversight the health insurance market would be better, and less expensive, for consumers??

RealLindaL wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:So what else is new? When I was in the private health insurance market, before Obamacare existed, I swallowed close to 20% rate hikes virtually every year. The big difference was that I was absolutely stuck with my insurer -- there was simply no competition or rate shopping possible -- as no one else would take me after my breast cancer diagnosis.

I don't know what the answer is, but clearly we haven't found it yet. Certainly returning to the prior 'free market' system is no answer at all.

There was never anything close to a free market in health insurance. Not from its inception as union risk pools... to the influence bought in Congress to limit real competition with rules and laws benefiting the large players.... right down to refusing to let companies into multiple states. That's central planning.

Perhaps "free market" was not the correct term...but surely you're not suggesting that with absolutely no oversight the health insurance market would be better, and less expensive, for consumers??

Of course, a "free market" would result in far less expensive health insurance.

I'm no oversight whatsoever. There are a few bad apples in any industry.

The largest cost of health care insurance is due to the multitude of mandates required by the government to be included in a policy. The coverage I do not need, do not want, will not use but are required by law to be in our policy.

Allow consumers to purchase what insurance WE want, not what a bureaucrat SAYS WE WANT. Just as we do with auto insurance.

Allow consumers to purchase what they want across state lines, just as we do with auto insurance.

It's not that difficult. Government WANTS to control us. They can't bear to relinquish that control over our lives.

Remember, it was Jonathan Gruber who told us that anyone who supported Obamacare, was stupid. He said it more than once, so it wasn't a slip, he is dead serious.

I must live in the twilight zone because my friends who took early retirement because they are no longer tied down with their preexisting conditions to former employers are happy as pigs in chit. I have not heard one of these fifty something folks complain about care or rates. Actually, the only place I have heard complaints are on this forum. My experience is that President Obama's popularity is directly proportional to many older Americans who were not real fans of President Obama getting real benefit and freedom from the ACA. The funniest thing about the implications related to swing states is that among the none college educated knucle draggers, they were not going to vote for Hillary regardless, but growing numbers of educated white suburban folks are very happy with the ACA........the difference being that somebody who gets an eighty buck a month increase in their health care bill should vote for their economic interests and vote Democratic, but they are lock step knucle draggers, while traditional Republicans are finding the ACA to be a few dollars more which was consistent with the last thirty year inflation, but the freedom is priceless.....two different mind sets and the polls indicate that Hillary is winning in part because of the success with the ACA.

http://familiesusa.org/product/50-state-look-medicaid-expansion

Obamacaid