Reddit Posts
Interview of James A. Mai and Ben Hockett from Cornwall Capital
MBH CORPORATION ANNOUNCES NEW BOARD MEMBERS IAN ELSEY, KEVIN HANBURY, PETER LAWRENCE & SIMON MARTIN
HEALTH EMERGENCY EXECUTIVE ORDER AND AN AWAITED OPPORTUNITY FOR EVOFEM's PHEXXI THE ONLY NON-HORMONAL PREVENTIVE CONTRACEPTION DRUG IN THE ACA LIST-
Revolutionary, Hormone-free, 2-in-1 STD Prevention and Birth Control Gel With Top-line Results Expected In The Second Half of 2022.
EVFM bioscience has an opportunity to reach $5
$EVFM ready to take off - ACA soon and sales will raise fast☄️🖐💎🖐
Evofem just hit the bottom, read for analysis and why. As CEO said today change will happen suddenly. $EVFM debt problem solved. Expenses solved, revenue growth on track
$EVFM back to the essence: Women's health!
Why I'm strongly positive about Evofem $EVFM
You might not know this company , but you will use their product soon 😍 ✅ it's about $EVFM
You might not know this company , but you will use their product soon 😍 ✅
You might not know this company , but you will use their product soon 😍 ✅
Evofem catalysts before end of the year . 590% upside potential, big short squeeze is possible .
Evofem short squeeze possiblity and catalysts before end of the year . 590% upside potential
$CANO Big Way to Play Boomers Aging, Execs Recently Made Huge Open Market Purchases
Getting ahead in Hearing aid investing before law is enacted. Good idea?
EVFM. ACA pH modulator category looks approved for 2H:21. University segment should begin contributing for 21/22 plan year. Long calls, write 7.50 / 1.00 put vertical at least 30 days out.
Evofem the only non-hormonal birth control "pill"
Evofem the only non-hormonal birth control "pill"
SCOTUS just upheld the ACA a third time, which means BUY CLOV.
EVFM is the Sex Stock Play of the Summer
EVFM is the Sex Stock Play of the Summer
ACA.PA new operation - come explain to me
RETAIL INVESTORS + APES are Changing the Market Forever: CLOV SQueeze + What comes after the SQueeze? -----------> ANSWER: Huge Value Creation for CLOV
RETAIL INVESTORS + APES are Changing the Market Forever: CLOV SQueeze + What comes after the SQueeze? -----------> ANSWER: Huge Value Creation for CLOV
My Watchlist For 5/13/2021 - Can $SPY Like.... Fucking Stop?? Good God...
PART 2 – Understanding Washington: The Timeline and Calendar of Cannabis Legislation (2021)
How will changes in the ACA by the Democratic Congress and office affect healthcare stocks?
IntelGenx, Psilocybin, is a double from here, says Leede Jones Gable
Mentions
Some states offer health care coverage to undocumented migrants using state funds, but no one can use medicaid funds because they're specifically excluded from doing so. That said, the cuts to medicaid are going to change the ACA Medicaid expansions and will force states to cover more for Healthcare or drop people entirely. This will result in undocumented migrants receiving coverage having benefits slashed as well. The direct cuts will largely affect undocumented migrants through emtala and the second order affects where state budgets get strained. The 12 million ish numbers that get thrown around are primarily concerned with the people who are enrolled in medicaid plans via state health exchanges and their versions of Medicare (Hawk-I, mass health, etc). Those are all us citizens and lawful residents.
• *Roughly 17 million people would lose health coverage and become uninsured by 2034 because of the Medicaid and ACA marketplace cuts in the bill, the bill’s failure to extend enhanced premium tax credits for ACA marketplace coverage, and other harmful ACA marketplace changes being made via rule changes, according to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). That’s up from the House Republican plan, which would cause about 16 million people to become uninsured.* • *CBO estimates that 11.8 million people would become uninsured due to Medicaid and ACA marketplace cuts in the Senate bill.* • *An additional 4.2 million people would lose marketplace coverage because the legislation fails to extend the premium tax credit enhancements.* • *Another 900,000 in losses come from earlier CBO estimates related to a marketplace rule the Trump Administration has since finalized. (Updated estimates accounting for the final rule and its potential interactions with the Senate bill are not available at this time.)* • *When people lose their health coverage, they lose access to preventive and primary care, care for life-threatening conditions, and treatments for chronic conditions. For example, a person with diabetes who loses health coverage would lose the ability to properly manage their condition so they can maintain their health as well as their employment* https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/by-the-numbers-senate-republican-reconciliation-bill-takes-health-coverage-away
I am old enough that i lived through having to watch america go insane, and its infuriating seeing americans not know a goddamn thing about their own system. But Obama didnt have a 24 month supermajority in the senate (aka 60 votes), [it was a 4 month one (see link for timeline)](https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/fleeting-illusory-supermajority-msna200211). And you may not think the ACA aka obamacare was the best thing in the world. But he did get it through, and its millions and millions and millions of americans healthcare. That was a big deal, and something popular, they still havent managed to kill it, since its so popular. God forbid the democrats get any credit for anything they do, since obviously they are just paid opposition.
What's your healthcare plan for retirement? Making Medicaid and likely the ACA credits inaccessible to adults without dependents is pretty terrible for FIRE. Worse than slightly slower stock market growth for sure.
Have you ever considered that the ACA and Inflation Reduction Act were made IN RESPONSE to those things happening? Genuinely wondering.
ACA exchange subsidies (why Oscar was down) are not tied to Medicaid in any way. Hix is when ppl purchase commercial insurance on exchanges. CNC pulled their guidance due to low enrollment & higher costs in hix. CNC’s blow up had read thrus to other MCOs — Oscar, elevance, Molina all have high exposure to hix so were hit the hardest. The amount of upvotes given to people pointing to the budget as the driver shows how dumb “dumb” money really is
That already happened in a bunch of places with ACA, because their Republican politicians decided to turn down the free Medicaid funding. Medicaid's payments to the hospitals were cut under ACA because the expanded Medicaid access was supposed to make up for it, since they'd have way less uninsured patients that couldn't pay for their services. So it really screwed over a lot of hospitals surrounded by many poor people who still didn't have insurance thanks to stubborn Republican politicians who turned down free money.
Dragging OSCR down with it. Monitoring that situation. CNC is apparently heavily involved in Medicare, where as OSCR has less exposure there and more to the ACA exchanges.
>Medicare will shrink by about $2 trillion, pushing more seniors into private Medicare Advantage plans that can cost more. IIRC, ACA Medicare is available to all U.S. adults ages 65 and older, regardless of income, but ages 19-64 needs to work minimum 80 hours a month to be eligible to ACA (affordable care). Big healthcare REITs won't suffer as seniors are always eligible (ages 65+). The side benefit is 21% corp tax made permanent and 2017 personal taxes and exemptions are permanent (Both are ending by Dec 2025). With this bill, market goes back again bullish.
https://www.crfb.org/blogs/breaking-down-one-big-beautiful-bill That includes a general breakdown of provisions each committee contributed to the bill and the costs of those tax cuts, spending cuts and new spending for each committee based on the version House GOP passed last month and changes made by GOP in the Senate prior to June 24th. $158 billion in new spending on top of current spending from immigration, border and customs even though those seem to be very effective under current spending levels. $983 billion in spending cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and ACA premium tax credit. That hurts everyone with health insurance, not just those that will lose coverage from Medicare, Medicaid and ACA marketplace. Insurance is a cost sharing model and most of the health plans those groups have is through private insurers like United and BCBS. There are $401 billion in cuts to Education for most types of federal student loans along with income-driven repayment plans. It also it includes increasing undergrad loam limits. Those limits have been limiting tuition and fee increases because those have to stay at a level people can afford to pay through student loan since a majority cannot afford to pay tuition and fees out of pocket. The 10-year deficit calculations do not take into account the total federal revenue collected through interest on new student loans. That committee used creative math to determine the amount of those spending cuts.
UnitedHealth may benefit as more seniors pick Medicare Advantage plans, but cuts to Medicaid and ACA could reduce revenue, and more uninsured patients may push hospital costs higher. The gains from Medicare Advantage might balance out these risks, but investors will watch closely. The stock is already significantly down 50 percent from its 52 weeks high of $630. Let’s see how it closes on friday
“After-hours sell-off tied to new political developments in the “Big Beautiful Bill” that could reduce ACA subsidies and Medicaid enrollment—both critical for Oscar’s business.” They offer a Medicare supplement plan (Medicare advantage part c)
ACA is a medicaid expansion. Oscar is very connected to medicaid.
Truly terrifying stuff. I’m worried about ACA subsidies taken away, which will also screw a lot of people (myself included). My plan is $375 a month (for two people); take away credits/subsidies and it would be closer to $1100. At that point, we just wouldn’t have health insurance because we couldn’t afford it. A very ugly can of worms being opened for sure.
BBB makes 2010 ACA look popular AF. 250 Dem calls in House
Try middle aged sandwich generation women who have been in and out of the workforce for months and years. You gonna hire a college-educated lady who spent the past two years cooking, cleaning, and maintaining a house for grandma, and juggling school obligations, transportation, puchasing, cooking, and doctors appointments for a disabled child-tween for ten years before that, but is doing it “for free” so doesnt make enough “earned income” to qualify for ACA plans? Are you going to pay enough for them to afford health insurance AND a home health aide, personal chef, landscaper, and driver? If so, DM me.
It will be worse. Not because it could not be bad, but because every state which has tried some of these "reforms" has failed miserable. The government is severely under-estimating how many people they are going to be kicking off these programs. [https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/28/upshot/republicans-medicaid-work-requirement.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/28/upshot/republicans-medicaid-work-requirement.html) Firstly, it's super expensive to create the computer systems. Secondly, once you have the systems (like Georgia) once you get through the appeals process because it wasn't decided in time - they had enrollment of 7.5k when 100k were expected on a state program. There are 78m people on medicaid/CHIP. That's 78m serviced by Humana, UNH, etc. Now, make a buggy computer system and chop that down by half - or if Georgia is correct - to 1/10th. Remember the ACA website rollout disaster? This is a big, +12.5 billion dollar project whose cost will be born by the states but the timeline dictated by the federal government. This is assuming a cost of $250m to create the systems in each state, or $250m charged to each state after the software is made once and sold 50x. There is no way a project of this size will be under budget or on time. Government run Medicare/Medicaid services are also some of the lowest per-person cost with reasonably good outcomes - cost and effectiveness was at the heart of "Medicare for all" cry that you may have remembered from 2 years back - an eon ago in today's time. Medicare Advantage, which was offloading Medicare to private providers is generally terrible and what you often hear about. However, there's so much money to be made (cough, cough, UNH) that the idea was beaten down most likely by discretely working entrenched corporate interests who float free market solutions are always better. Not everything works that way because of profit motivations. Education, defense - all littered with companies that promised the moon, under-delivered and made a fortune in the meantime. But you're looking at an effective decrease in service by 2028 of probably 50% or more of the 78m who currently receive Medicaid. I can't see Kentucky having a spare $300m to throw at a "are you working" portal. And it does cost that much.
> Right, but every dollar of gains you draw from tax deferred is eventually taxed at ordinary income rates, instead of zero % CG rate. Far more likely instead of 15% CG rate. > If all of your draw is ordinary income can cause issues with ACA subsidies and IRMAA for medicare, and could easily force taxes on SS. It's not that there aren't downsides -- it's that there are upsides AND downsides, and generally the upside of retirement account outweighs the downsides. Quick and dirty envelope math ahead... lets say we want to throw in $10k towards retirement. The taxable account way: * Throw $10k into a taxable account, leave it for some decades. Now it's worth $100k. * Liquidate, pay $13,500 in capital gains on that $90,000 of gains, live on the remaining 86,500. * Have $90k AGI because CG is included in adjusted gross income, get lousy subsidies because you ain't broke. The retirement account way: * Throw $13,150 into a 401k because it's the same out-of-pocket ducking a 24% marginal income tax rate, leave it for some decades. It's now worth $131,500. * Take out $104,500, leaving $27,000 behind. Pay ~17.2% because you're traversing the tax brackets, live on the same $86,500. * Have $104,500 AGI, get lousy subsidies because you ain't broke. * Your $27,000 is worth about $30,000 the following year, roughly 1/3 of the way towards paying for the following year of retirement.
Oscar is not in Medicaid dumb dumb. They are in private placement insurance through the ACA marketplace. If congress passes Medicare! Part E., then we have a very wide net of new potential customers. Read up because your info is wrong Buddy. Oscar is like what T-Mobile was when they tried doing Uncarrier. Currently people on Medicare and Medicaid cannot get Oscar. Oscar is a commercial plan. https://preview.redd.it/cwtya91o6b8f1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2e479d645447a26e0568883b43139e0ceafed56e
I have Oscar through the ACA, and so far they are wonderful. I was blown away when I had to call and ask about something and I was on hold for maybe 2-3 minutes and I was able to talk to a person directly.
I've had 1st class healthcare through my employers for over 20 years. The same amount deducted out of my check would have gone to taxes. I've never had to wait to see a doctor, specialist, etc. We have the most advanced medical devices and procedures on the planet. Before that, I got it in college, and before that, I was on my family's plan. Now, my wife and kids are on my plan. Poor people get ACA. Everyone in America has health insurance, or should in 2025. I wouldn't trade our system for any other in the world. My son had a 70k foot surgery last year that cost me 4k. Its interest free and I only pay about $100 month. My other son just got a PRP injection in a tendon for a sports related injury. It's experimental, so it wasn't covered by health insurance, but it only cost me $800 and should help him heal about 5x faster.
Infrastructure week … in 2 weeks, ACA replaced with his own plan … in 2 weeks … Iran decision … in 2 weeks … and next on WTF
Which was an “obama phone.” What trump is doing is nothing like what he did, which was a government subsidy to help people get a phone since it is considered a necessity. It was called obama phone the same way ACA is called obamacare. Just morons attaching his name to it unnecessarily. What trump is doing is marketing a phone and service under his own name for his own profit.
would have to pay back some of the advance premium tax credit if taxable gains were not expected when enrolling in ACA health insurance at [healthcare.gov](http://healthcare.gov)
While ACA will unlikely be gutted. It is still a concentration risk, until they can prove ICHRA works. I like the new CEO but... he's 69 years old now. And I looked into [glassdoor.com](http://glassdoor.com), their employees are very unhappy with the new change (CEO started April 2024). The score is at 3.2 (lowest among their industry is 2.99). CEO is legit for sure, he can cut costs and make company profitable. But how long will he be in charge, and will their employees reject their management in the long run?
I recently looked into this stock as well since their numbers are attractive. I also listened to their CEO, and CTO giving an interview and I think their CEO is very capable (but he is super old). But I still have some concerns... I looked into their presentation slide (2024): [https://s27.q4cdn.com/943936911/files/doc\_presentations/2024/Jun/07/oscar-health-2024-investor-day.pdf](https://s27.q4cdn.com/943936911/files/doc_presentations/2024/Jun/07/oscar-health-2024-investor-day.pdf) Their estimate growth are relaying on potential upside from ACA enhanced subsidies extension to grow 20% cagr. But the extension is unlikely ? I also don't like that most of their revenue TODAY is coming from ACA. Which can be gone. Yes it's unlikely, but this is a risk. It stops me from going all-in, unless they can grow revenue from ICHRA or other sources to be 20-30% of their revenue. I also think their AI is not a big strength like what everybody think. Yes they use AI, but it's a collaboration with OpenAI. It's not in-house AI model development. Anybody can use chatgpt to summarize the documents. I won't give them point for AI, but will give them point for being technology first. Overall, I probably buy small portion, and slowly buy more depending on their quarter results. But will not buy the dip (if their quarterly results got poorly). Their risk will always be there until they show that they can grow beyond ACA market.
Let's hope to see some good for OSCR I think the most likely is that ACA is extended (at least not radically reduced and/or temporary extension). This needs to be communicated before end of summer. If our politicians don't blew up the world before then, we should see an increase on the good news there
Just like the war in Ukraine is ending tomorrow. And his ACA replacement plan was coming out in 2 weeks about 7 years ago.
My god, CNBC hosts don’t understand how ACA premiums work? Jesus F Christ.
Lol, no the fuck they aren't. Health insurance costs about $7,000 a year on average for an Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plan, based on our analysis. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/how-much-does-health-insurance-cost/ The average in the EU is $3869 annually, lol. And they get for more complete coverage and that's without it being under an "affordable" care act https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/euu/european-union/healthcare-spending
The poor earnings consistency is a succinct point and cuts deep. They screwed up on their pricing and the analysts have never forgiven them. I believe the expression "there is no greater zealot than a convert" applies and that won't happen again. I don't see how Medicaid changes effect them given they are not in that market. Maybe there are secondary ripples from those changes I've not considered. I'm honestly not concerned about the ACA. It's not going anywhere as rolling that back would guarantee The Republicans lose the senate and the house in 2026. Just look at the ACA enrollees by state and cross reference that to the majorities thel incumbent senators will be defending in 2026, check North Carolina, Texas, Florida and Ohio. The fact that these states are so heavy ACA, so dependent on the enhanced subsidies and so critical to keeping the senate make me quietly confident we will see a bill rushed through at least temporarily extending subsidies after the reconciliation work is completed in the BBB. Balance sheet is strong however not as strong as Finwits are making out as they just focusing on the big cash numbers without understanding why. Anyone considering a position would do well to ignore that chatter in their due diligence and thought process. Questions that need to be asked and answered are Q. Why aren't they guiding for 2026 revenue and margins? A. Uncertainty around enhanced subsidies, how ICHRA will take off in year 1 Q. Then given the above why are the guiding $2.25 EPS for 2027 and 5% margins? A. Because they know their trajectory and they know they're only using ACA as a stepping stone in their larger plan to dominate the Individual Market and maybe for their AI stack to start becoming the must have interface for administering ICHRA. Q. But.. but.. but.. Trump..Obamacare. cuts A. It's not happening, read the relevant sections in the BBB. Ignore the loaded language from people trying to drive political fear. They might not extend the enhanced subsidies but that could be political suicide itself, aside from trying to stop fraudulent applicants they are however not touching the meat and bones of ACA plans Q. Why do you keep saying ICHRA, what it is? A. Do some research, ask your friends. Then ask yourself do you want to control your healthcare or do you want your employer to pick it for you? Maybe think about your 401k and if you like that control or if you'd prefer your HR team to be guiding your pension investment. I really want to hear more data from the ground as to how this as an option will land with people in different age groups and circumstances. My own admittedly limited research has shown it comes as a shock but people love the idea after it is explained properly to them. Some want it, some decline but the idea is they have a choice of personal plan or group plan now and there are incentives to get employers on board. There is even more nuance in this bill like what appears to be having a HSA and using excess tax advantaged funds for deductibles, dental plans, gym memberships but I'm not happy enough with my own understanding and due diligence here to say that's absolutely the case or not. There are some states this doesn't work in like New York, New Jersey and I believe Vermont as they don't allow for individual pricing to vary even taking into account the age of the applicant but the rest of the states allow it. The individual market will fail in these states until those rules are relaxed. I am clearly extremely bullish on this stock and it's taking every ounce of self control not to YOLO and get in heavy now. I need structure, break out, testing, gap fills and support and only at that point I'm going to throw the kitchen sink and maybe my first born at this stock
Strong revenues, but poor earnings consistency over past 5 years. Most recent quarter shows promise but there are risks. Regulatory changes, including potential impacts from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and Medicaid redeterminations, remain critical factors affecting future operations. Strong balance sheet.
The bear case is all around the lack of clear extension of the enhanced subsidies for ACA. What is being missed is - They don't need these extensions, they're plan has been ICHRA and the BBB (Big Beautiful Bill) has just given then a silly leg up by getting ICHRA into the mainstream. The company I work for (200 US based people, multi state) are setting up our ICHRA scheme right now. Oscar lead ICHRA management as they are built from the ground up to handle them efficiently - Their SG&A costs are mainly fixed. This means for every dollar of additional sales about 15 to 18% is going to the bottom line. That 1.2% net margin people are worried about is about to get smashed and they are guiding for 5% in 2027. They always underpromise and overdeliver so more likely 6% will be the outturn. Understanding fixed cost leverage appears to be a gene that many humans lack. - Their MLR is hovering at about 80% averaged over a few quarters which is the best you can have in ACA. I believe no cap applies to ICHRA. They know their pricing extremely well after being burned a few years ago and punished by the market. - Their +Oscar platform is the cherry on top. If they licence this out and they are trying to... then suddenly they have 40% EBITDA revenue on top of their insurance model and growing SAAS revenues attract silly multiples. My belief is the x5 volume spike a few days ago without any clear news is that something BIG was signed and will come out in a week or so. - Their CEO Mark Bertolini is the absolute 🐐 check out his interviews. - They have deep government connections. They don't just know which way the wind is blowing, to a certain extent they can make it blow the way they want. Their CEO is likely the person who got Ways and Means to add these simple ICHRA changes to allow it to thrive and hoover up the SMB market. - There is lots of chat about their cash pile. Ignore this. It's almost all regulatory required for their current number of members. What got me started was this youtube video https://youtu.be/ic70uj4qUDg?si=DozERthw8lzw1z_i It's private so does not have anywhere near the views it deserves and is quality analysis on what $OSCR are up to - Bear case is ACA gets gutted (very unlikely), ICHRA fails to take off (I already have seen crazy interest in it) or good old simple failed execution (not with the track record of their current board) I am frankly ready to back the proverbial truck into this stock once it clears the volume shelf at about 18 and tests the support a few times
Had never heard of OSCR - Did some cursory research and going concerns about ACA-related extensions in the short-term seem to be weighing heavily. If you believe the current ACA situation will continue, they seem like a solid buy.
Yeah honestly the last wild card case I could tell you was the ACA one where Robert's basically crossed lines and said okay this is still tax so we're okay with it because to be honest with you at that time so many people had enrolled in Obamacare that to undo the program would probably have caused a lot more damage
Ugh... Hate to disagree. I think the Federal Medicaid cut will generate a higher margin for private insurers. Because some of these Medicaid insured people would have to be dropped or no longer be elegible for Medicaid (1-2% margin business for UNH). These people now have to move on to higher margin health insurance via ACA or commercial.
Honestly the biggest issue in the United States, and I say this frequently on Reddit is our lack of political willpower to increase taxes. [https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/federal-budget-receipts-and-outlays](https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/federal-budget-receipts-and-outlays) Since Eisenhower (after him), LBJ had one year of a balanced budget taxing 19% of GDP. Clinton's second term budgets were all balanced taxing between 19% and 20% of GDP. In the post Clinton era we've averaged taxing about 17% of GDP. Bush taxed about 17% of GDP prior to the Great Recession period (4 years) averaging about 15% of GDP. Post Great Recession, eventually the Obama administration neared 18% of GDP taxed. Trump 1 averaged about 16% of GDP taxed pre-COVID. Based on current legislation, it appears we are likely to see much of the same for Trump 2. I haven't updated the numbers on my end but Biden likely taxed about 18% of GDP, and the numbers likely fell off during his presidency while also having the COVID dollars still on his budget and passing the first industrial policy & infrastructure investments in north of 40 years. All this to say, before boomers retired we needed to tax about 20% of GDP to balance the budget. We've taxed about 16-17% this entire 25 year period, which has left us with the debt we have. We had some investments that had to be made to save the economy, that would have left us with some debt otherwise, but as you can see from that link a minimum of 14 of the last 25 years would not have seen meaningful budget deficits if we taxed the way Clinton did (20% of GDP). Additionally two clear areas of issue, is the ACA increased Medicaid spending by about 2% of GDP, and with Part D and an increasing retiree population Medicare spending relative to GDP has increased by about 2%. This tells us just assuming no changes there alone, that to balance the budget today we need to likely tax about 24% of GDP. Reality is we have to find cost savings in the Medi-programs, but to balance the budget we have to increase taxes significantly (preferably not on the average American) so that we are taxing nearer 20+% of GDP. Again, in 60+ years we have not balanced a budget with less than 19% of GDP taxed, and that was before we had a retiree class. Taxing 16-17% of GDP and then arguing we have a "spending problem" is a total meme.
Because Democrats (not DINOs) didnt have majority in senate. They needed Manchin and likes and they have openly stated they would be against big change and yet got elected. As a reminder last time Democrats had actual majority we got ACA which has been a great improvement. People are asking the question you asked without realizing how Democrats had a narrow majority.
UNH is in survival mode imo, "the dividend" is a bid to appear strong when they are weak to float them til EOY when they will have locked in another year of premiums. Right now and for the next couple of months is when employers are hashing out details re: which plans to offer at open enrollment. We learned when the CEO got murked that everyone that has been insured by them fucking hates UNH and will happily watch it burn to the ground. In those HR calls and contract negotiations right now, I bet people are saying "Maybe we should dump UNH this year, remember all that bad press?" Companies that might have just signed up for more of the same shit UNH plan are probably shopping UNH competitors right now. Some of them will dump UNH for the competitor. Some may be convinced to stay if UNH gets desperate and provides a counter offer which will eat profits, but pad numbers. Lastly, at open enrollment this fall, individuals whose employer offers multiple plans or who are shopping the ACA marketplace will have the opportunity to choose UNH or not UNH. I know - you regards all think "cost is all that matters, if UNH is cheap people will sign up". Hard disagree. Look at fucking TGT right now. I've never seen Americans as united as they were hating on UNH last December. I think a lot of pissed off people that now recognize UNH as shitty are going to pick literally any other plan this fall. Anyways good luck and God speed OP - iIm actually hoping it moons between now and August so I can grab some long dated puts at an attractive price. This could work out for both of us.
While this is true, only one party continually runs on “stopping reckless spending” then does exactly the same thing every time. At least the Dems pretend to do things for regular people that have to be paid for, republicans just add to the debt, cut taxes for the west hot, bitch about Dems. At least Obama passed ACA, Biden passed BBB, Trump did…. Tax cuts for the wealthy in 16, now it’s.. tax cuts again for the wealthy. Both sides need a new playbook tho.
All that means is that the GOP has the votes in the senate to pass it without him. The GOP always does this; once they have the votes they let members in their caucus take meaningless performative stances for the cameras. If the GOP needed it Paul would vote along with the Party like the good little commie his is. In my nearly 40 years of watching US politics I have seen exactly one time the GOP took an important vote to the senate floor and had it fail; and that was because John McCain literally lied to The Turtle about voting to overturn the ACA (and he only found the courage to do that when he was literally dying). The GOP is all about the showmanship. This is meaningless, Paul has no principles, he's just an actor giving blow jobs to his billionaire donors and he will fall in line when needed. Don't fall for his bullshit.
Jared kushner cofounded this company and it relies on ACA credits, I’ll be damned if trump does not renew it. This is a good bet. I swing trade this stock a lot but the market has just been too hot lately scaring me.
Thoughts on ACA subsidies risk here? (Enhanced subsidies that have supported enrolment and affordability under the Affordable Care Act are set to expire at the end of 2025. If these subsidies are reduced or removed, Oscar’s membership and revenue could decline significantly)
Thoughts on ACA subsidies expiring end of 2025 if no action taken by Congress? This will heavily impact the numbers. This is the only big risk I see.
file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/75/05/723B5FA3-8505-45A5-ACA3-C34BC277F8FD/9BEBE4A4-2C9C-4C8E-8659-2C80668A95E4.gif
I can see this if they actually worked without pain. But these still have his name on it and others will still want to get rid of it because of that. Just like he wanted to get rid of Obama’s ACA.
I have recently learned that the vast majority of our populace have no clue how tariffs work over the long term. There are economists on tv who clearly don’t understand them so that’s certainly no slight to the many of you perplexed. When they built the ACA, essentially one guy put it together as a whole. He tried to explain it to the rest of you and became frustrated at just how few, even “smart” people, actually understand it. That’s how I feel everyday at this point. Tariffs and how they work is not complicated. How they manipulate positive outcomes for your country - also not complicated. How they return certain businesses that are vital to defense and even more importantly deterrence - not complicated. I just can’t anymore with so many of you. I will say this though - politicos have turned almost all of you stupid. I’m not talking a little bit stupid either. I’m talking full on, lemming off a cliff dumb. You’re depth off thought is that of a mud puddle. Most of you are well educated and surely paid for it. What you should be doing instead of writing in here and adding to the economic ignorance in our country, is asking your universities for refunds. I don’t like Trump; I didn’t vote for either primary party candidates. However, his economic policies are not only exceptional long term, they are absolutely necessary to avoid an economic collapse and a Third World War that WAS almost inevitable without drastic changes.
Doesn't the ACA define full time as over 30 hours for insurance purposes?
If the ACA ends it goes bankrupt
The working poor making minimum wage gets hit by the two biggest tax increases in American history via the Trump Tax (tariffs) and the "Big Beautiful Bill" while losing their Medicaid and ACA subsidies but Grandpa Dipshit gets a $90 million birthday parade...
I get what you’re saying. And the problem is that liberals simply don’t play that way. They follow the law, they preach “decorum” and whatnot. They have to do that because they do not have a cult following like republicans do. They cannot rely on people - even liberals voting for them. They rarely hold onto power for any significant length of time and then they do, they are squeamish (see ACA) - but I would happily cast a vote for someone willing to stick to their guns and push proper legislation down just like republicans do with bad legislation.
Tax free Roth withdrawals do not result in payback to IRS of advance premium tax credit (ACA subsidy) on tax return.
You are sort of correct but not why you think. UNH's profits are basically predetermined. They cap out at 20% of the premiums they write. Anything over that they have to pay back to the customers (ACA law). All the health insurance companies have that cap. UNH was denying care which let them write cheaper premiums to gain a much higher market share including the low income expensive plans. They got knocked for denying care so they are now going to be forced to either A) pay the fines and continue to do more shady shit in which case the stock will go way up again B) eat the loss and decrease profit margin but keep their market share in which the share price will probably stay where its at C) they are forced or increase their premiums to be competitive which will cost them market share which will hurt the stock even more
Except every year since the ACA I get a notice from them saying my premium is going up. Any given year the increase has ranged between 5% and 21%.
The ACA says they have to spend 80% of premiums on medical costs.
I’ve worked in this industry for nearly 15 years. Insurers profits have been capped at 80-85% since the implementation of the ACA. The reason why UNH is profitably and will continue to do so is because they own Optum and buy a fuck ton of provider groups. This administration so far has been favorable to M&A and they will continue to crush it because department of insurers have no problem allowing them to raise premiums 7%+ a year because they’ve been able to benefit from inflation related costs at hospitals and med device companies. But since this is WSB… yes you should take out as many credit cards as you can and yolo this play.
People dont chose their insurance unless ACA/Individual, their employer choses it for them. UHG and others sell to C-suite and dont consider normal people customers at all.
Just call it "the funding bill." Done. Easy peasy. Fuck them. We don't have to play along. They renamed the ACA to Obamacare.....
And the fact that health insurance is generally tied to employment. If the GOP has their way with the ACA, people with pre-existing conditions won’t be able to leave crap jobs and rely on Marketplace coverage.
I want all of those things, too. The ACA was an amazing start. It takes decades to enact change like we want to see. Elections have consequences, so sometimes you just have to hold your nose while you push that button at the ballot box. But, at least we get people in there that set up the way for all of those things down the road. Now we have to claw back to just get to Obama level stuff. It’s MADDENING! Just vote even if you don’t like the person. Bc, let’s be honest, politics is just dirty and nasty and that’s how it always has been and always will be. Not voting at all is just a vote for the other side.
Summary of the bill: * **Debt-ceiling lift:** Raises federal borrowing limit by $4 trillion to avert default. * **Tax cuts & extensions:** * Extends most of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act through 2028 (including higher SALT cap of $40 000, expanded tip/overtime deductions, elder care credits) [Vox](https://www.vox.com/the-logoff-newsletter-trump/414154/trump-house-republicans-bill-tax-cuts-debt-limit-medicare?utm_source=chatgpt.com). * **Medicaid & healthcare rollbacks:** * Deep cuts to Medicaid funding; prohibits ACA and Medicaid coverage of gender-affirming care from 2027, mandates coverage for “detransition” services. * **Clean-energy rollbacks:** * Phases out EV tax credits and many Inflation Reduction Act renewable-energy incentives. * **Border and immigration enforcement:** * $46.5 billion for wall construction; funds 10 000 new ICE officers, 3 000 Border Patrol agents, added detention beds, and a tax on remittances. * **AI moratorium:** Strips states of authority to regulate AI for 10 years, preempting over 60 existing state‐level laws. * **Consumer‐protection cuts:** Caps CFPB’s access to Federal Reserve funding, further constraining its enforcement budget. * **Food‐assistance & student‐loan changes:** Cuts SNAP benefits and rolls back interest-free student-loan provisions, tightening eligibility and removing certain subsidies
Do you know that ACA is based off of a 2006 Massachusetts law that was enacted by a Republican governor? You probably didn’t, so keep being misguided by blaming one side.
ACA destroyed healthcare. Democrats are in favor of massive insurance companies controlling the entire system. And also they wanted your prices and deductibles to be out of reach. Democrats healthcare another epic failure. Party of clowns
Lol! Insurance companies have been negotiating drug prices for decades. Stop trying to blame the ACA.
Corruption was using the NWS to fund the ACA
A week. But it’s gonna fail. Just like the repeal of the ACA in his first term. He celebrated when it passed thru the house and got big mad when the senate said No!
Rural hospitals will close due to cutting Medicaid https://www.newsweek.com/medicaid-cuts-map-hospitals-risk-closure-2072095 >Across all the states that expanded Medicaid enrollment, 190 rural inpatient hospitals are at "immediate risk of closure" already, meaning Medicaid cuts would likely see these facilities shut down as House Republicans seem poised to target the states that expanded Medicaid enrollment under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. 40% of ALL US Births are paid by Medicaid, so you'll either see irrecoverable debt for births, or women will die, or worst is that Conservative States will get involved and harass the families of medically fragile pregnancies. https://www.acog.org/advocacy/policy-priorities/medicaid More than 16 million women of reproductive age are covered by the Medicaid program. Medicaid is the largest single payer of maternity care in the U.S., covering more than 40% of U.S. births and playing a critical role in ensuring healthy moms and babies. >Medicaid accounts for 75% of public family planning dollars, every $1 of which saves Medicaid $7.09. The Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion reduced the uninsured rate among women ages 18-64 by nearly half, from 19.3% to 10.8% in 5 years. According to a speech by AOC, Medicaid accounts for up to 30% of some entire State budgets. This equals masses of people: -being legislative/religiously harassed -bankrupt, -or fleeing Red states where they at least they know that the Governor won't interefere with their procedures.
They tried using the same process to kill the ACA back in 🥭 1 and failed. There's still hope
Problem is ACA forced this on Americans and now, 15 yrs later, there is a major conflict of interest. Tear a bicep? Get an xray before an mri. Doctor knows he needs an mri, but insurance company forces him to issue an xray first. Got an inoperable brain tumor? Insurance company says you got to use stereotactic radiation instead of proton therapy, even though doctor knows stereotactic will likely cause an adjacent tumor within 5 years. This is why health care insurance companies don’t work anymore. They have removed healthcare decisions away from doctor-patient and into the hands of lawyers and accountants. Doesn’t work. That’s why Congress has their own, separate, healthcare. It won’t last. These companies are all getting revamped. All of them.
I've used UnitedHealth for several years. Never had an issue. They're not as bad as people make them out to be. They may cross the line in favor of greed in some circumstances. That's what successful businesses do. Their network and coverage is unmatched. They've got employer and federal insurance locked down because of scale and cost of their services. 10% of the population purchases their own health insurance AKA "direct-purchase" health care. That's a relatively small number. And many still may choose UNH after carefully considering cost, network and plan offerings. In 2023, direct-purchase health insurance coverage in the U.S. increased to 10.2% of the population, according to the Census Bureau. This type of coverage, often purchased through the [Affordable Care Act (ACA)](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=c040be438cc12ffb&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1132US1132&cs=0&sxsrf=AHTn8zp2svi2CIYc_d_5R2WDXL_Lb-5lZw%3A1747851519670&q=Affordable+Care+Act+%28ACA%29&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjS1p6nlrWNAxWvj4kEHXQDMEQQxccNegQIBBAB&mstk=AUtExfAOJoLpQLmUW_1S4D6HFN0PsxVE92VoNfKy4wLV1jTc-iHgxLxYvXvGbpArFRSQUgGcUgZp17S6XCt_BjlBSiuX0pbAE8seXcaC212OBttTqFFNfEchHCQ3DitOoE6glvauu1qvgcYHa0uCG1_KkEtmSN7oRAtx2W8gUNLho62qp584iEAY0CgrG55WlrsBbMrw59o56-K4kwXnX-m9yWGSa_OKpQPELQ-rjxjTgnfluLkEJfDUL9gncHvbIJ-mv2W-YZaxCH1UoEtrTXBZjVV8&csui=3) marketplaces, was more prevalent than TRICARE (2.8%) and [VA/CHAMPVA](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=c040be438cc12ffb&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1132US1132&cs=0&sxsrf=AHTn8zp2svi2CIYc_d_5R2WDXL_Lb-5lZw%3A1747851519670&q=VA%2FCHAMPVA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjS1p6nlrWNAxWvj4kEHXQDMEQQxccNegQIBBAC&mstk=AUtExfAOJoLpQLmUW_1S4D6HFN0PsxVE92VoNfKy4wLV1jTc-iHgxLxYvXvGbpArFRSQUgGcUgZp17S6XCt_BjlBSiuX0pbAE8seXcaC212OBttTqFFNfEchHCQ3DitOoE6glvauu1qvgcYHa0uCG1_KkEtmSN7oRAtx2W8gUNLho62qp584iEAY0CgrG55WlrsBbMrw59o56-K4kwXnX-m9yWGSa_OKpQPELQ-rjxjTgnfluLkEJfDUL9gncHvbIJ-mv2W-YZaxCH1UoEtrTXBZjVV8&csui=3) coverage (0.9%), but less common than employment-based coverage (53.7%), Medicare (18.9%), or Medicaid (17.8%).
But you do seem to be missing something here. That people are generally okay with the murder of a CEO speaks to a prevailing zeitgeist. History has shown that when the disparity between haves and have-nots gets too great, there is generally some form of uprising. The public reaction to Luigi speaks volumes about where the public might be at in this cycle. Personally, I hope this is as far as it goes but with continued inflation and the potential of the ACA being stripped down to nothing, only time will tell.
ACA which turned out to be a success.
No, I do live in the US, have a high deductible health care plan, and have family members with major medical issues. So well aware of how steep healthcare costs can go. It seems you are attempting to make a moral argument. Whereas I’m just curious as to what the practical financial ramifications could be for going from Medicaid to an ACA plan.
I suppose where my disconnect here is that I’ve never been on Medicaid. Is there no copays with Medicaid and every doctor visit and prescription is 100% free? If so, I guess that makes some sense then. If you had a fully subsidized insurance policy through the ACA you would still have copays, so at least $25 per doctor visit.
I don’t debate the struggles that your brother is facing. He may want to take another look at the Healthcare Marketplace and confirm whether he qualifies for coverage along with the Premium Tax Credit. From what I can find out, it is the enhanced PTC that are set to expire at the end of 2025, which was originally passed under the 2021 Inflation Reduction Act. This was an expansion due to COVID. So seems the new tax bill is just rolling us back to the pre-COVID norm. That leaves us with the old rules. That allows for a PTC for taxpayers with incomes up to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Those thresholds are: $62,600 for a single-person household, $84,600 for a two-person household, $106,600 for a three-person household, and $128,600 for a four-person household. These thresholds are well over the income level for someone on Medicaid. This means their health insurance would be fully subsidized under the ACA.
I don’t debate the struggles a person of limited means goes through. What does the new tax plan do to the ACA premium tax credits (PTC)? From what I can find out, it is the enhanced PTC that are set to expire at the end of 2025, which was originally passed under the 2021 Inflation Reduction Act. This was an expansion due to COVID. So seems it’s just rolling us back to the pre-COVID norm. That leaves us with the old rules. That allows for a PTC for taxpayers with incomes up to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Those thresholds are: $62,600 for a single-person household, $84,600 for a two-person household, $106,600 for a three-person household, and $128,600 for a four-person household. These thresholds are well over the income level for someone on Medicaid. This means their health insurance would be fully subsidized under the ACA.
Obamacare isn’t a thing and it’s not free at any level. It’s the ACA and it’s a marketplace of PRIVATE insurance policies. At best some states use ACA to qualify people in poverty for…. wait for it… Medicaid. But if you are in the wrong state and poor and unemployed you don’t get anything. I have a brother living in Texas. His car broke down the same year he needed surgery for skin cancer. Guess what he did? Stopped driving. He didn’t buy a new car.
Except the guy saying we are facing some hard choices is not at all talking about either their own security and privilege nor that of their major donors. Jimmy Carter tried to pull that stupid shit too, while simultaneously passing some of the first deregulation and corporate tax reductions of the Neoliberal turn. Clinton again in the 90’s signed the Republican crafted and negotiated NAFTA bill while simultaneously selling “welfare reform” as something other than what it was, killing welfare. Obama again in the aughts tried to do the same playbook by bailing out the banks that caused the financial collapse at the expense of underwater homeowners while simultaneously trying to sell the ACA as anything other than but a Republican crafted bill. And people wonder why nobody believes the bullshit grift of the Democrats.
If they were working 80 hours a month then they don’t qualify for Medicaid and instead qualify for ACA subsidies. Or am I wrong?
The admin is after Medicaid though, not Medicare Advantage, where UNH has been having its issues with MCR costs, which led to them suspending guidance due to higher utilization. When they did that they actually forecast a return to growth in 2026, largely because this Admin just significantly increased the CMS payment rate to MA plans for 2026. They increased payment rates for MA plans by 5.1%, the largest increase in the past decade, and more than double the 2.2% the Biden admin had proposed in January. The major healthcare incumbents like UNH and Humana were outright celebrating as they had seen their margins under extreme pressure during the Biden admin. I find it hard to believe people think this admin would be bearish for Medicare Advantage plays. Oz has advocated many times in the past for privatizing healthcare entirely, and making it all MA. The GOP has consistently favoured privatization and MA, and Trump and his cronies are much the same. These people all favour private sector. UNH and other big healthcare players have lots of issues, and this administration won’t magically erase all of them, but they shall very likely make the environment far more favourable for them through deregulation and payment rates. And to do so, they will gut Medicaid and the ACA like we are already seeing unfortunately.
Not sharing my medical issues on a public forum is not bs. I also had employer sponsored healthcare when I had Aetna and cancer was discovered. This is not the "gotcha" you think it is and has nothing to do with the ACA which protects people like me with pre existing conditions, at least for now. I answered you because I assumed good faith on your part. Now it's clear that good faith had nothing to do with it. Ps. Wipe your mouth of the cheeto crumbs.
This sounds like BS to me you wouldn’t elaborate on what kind of cancer you go or if you were working or under ACA Obama?
It's because it's considered the "Apple" of healthcare, a leader vs the rest because of its size and diversification- they handle close to 15% of the entire US healthcare market, and they're vertically integrated because the ACA essentially capped the % of profit insurers can make- which led to the healthcare mess we're in today- UNH has involvement in every single step of the healthcare system Here's a link I like when I was reading about a possible buy: [https://www.unionhealthcareinsight.com/post/unitedhealth-group-approach-to-vertical-consolidation](https://www.unionhealthcareinsight.com/post/unitedhealth-group-approach-to-vertical-consolidation)
The Trump Tax, the tourist arrests (tourism down 90%), the weekly Market pump and dumps....Trump is obliterating the booming Biden economy, I hate to think of where we'll be at in 6 months. Next year will decimate people as 20+ million will lose their health insurance due to Medicaid/ACA subsidy cuts in the current asinine MAGA budget, which add $4 TRILLION to the debt and $3 Trillion to the deficit year by year.
I think this is a way to end the ACA in the pharmacy aspect: look now we have “cheaper drug prices” so you don’t need insurance to cover them. Whether we get cheaper drug prices? Maybe? Il believe it when it happens.
You need to give up the conservative dogma against single payer though. Trump shows no signs of doing that because the ACA was enacted by Obama.
And the dems will be on the exact opposite side. My guess is that the best solution would be to actually have a global market so that pharma companies can't region lock prices (in the developed world...developing world should still get subsidized medicine). Then we could just buy the same drugs from Canada or Europe for 10% of the US price or whatever. But those countries guard their supply, so there is no open market here. One of the problems here (far from the only one) is that the ACA capped profit margin in health care. So they way they make more money (gross profit) is to increase prices. And since the people paying for stuff (us) have no control over prices, there are huge perverse incentives for prices to be massive here.
What did the ACA and BBB plan do? That's right, they combine for over $1T in tax breaks for the top 0.01% of wealthy Americans.
Wait til the ACA gets gutted lolz
[https://www.kff.org/private-insurance/issue-brief/claims-denials-and-appeals-in-aca-marketplace-plans-in-2023/](https://www.kff.org/private-insurance/issue-brief/claims-denials-and-appeals-in-aca-marketplace-plans-in-2023/) (ACA plans only) But there's others, must google
I see the parasite comment below. Agree, but they aren't going anywhere. Especially in this administration, and especially if Trump does something to hurt ACA's spread. Yes, they have 25% of their revenue from Medicare, but margins will still be there given the actual changes from the Rx drug EO Trump signed. At $318 per share and 907.14mm shares outstanding, their marketcap is now only $288 billion? Assuming revenue drops 20% to $320billion (it won't), they're trading for less than 1x sales and are one of the best run organizations in America with many business lines? They aren't losing money, and likely won't. PE will be solid. I bought long calls and shares today. Though, I did jump the gun a little and wasn't near the current lows.
The US does this too (to a much lesser extent) mostly with private insurers (via PBMs), but also under Medicaid via the ACA. The huge issue is that Medicare Part-D was negotiated by - you guessed it, the GOP - as a giant give-away to Big Pharma dressed up as a benefit for "grandma" (the people). They agreed to the coverage, but only if the law *forbid the government from negotiating on prices with big Pharma!* That was the price of GOP votes. The Dems have been trying for years to undo this ridiculous policy (they wanted coverage for seniors, so they agreed to compromise with the GOP). Finally, as part of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare was able to negotiate prices starting in 2024 (before Trump was back in office) and prices have been lowered. This is mostly Trump trying to take credit for something Biden already did, particularly since the EO does not carry the weight of law, and the law that does carry some weight was Biden's doing.
Marketing includes things like patient assistance programs though The negotiations don’t impact prices paid by the patient, only the amount that Medicare gets as a kickback from drug companies (the rebate) The ACA mandates yearly additional rebate negotiations and the list of next years drugs has been published already
Pre-ACA there were certainly problems, but the cost explosion is directly from the ACA. Aetna, or any other insurer has no incentive to negotiate lower drugs prices at all. They want them as high as possible. The ACA caps their profits at 25% of what they pay out on claims. So the only way for insurance companies to increase profits is to increase costs as well. People seem to not remember how cheap insurance used to be, for $80 a month you could get a good plan that actually covered stuff, but no, you couldn't sign up AFTER you got a serious illness. Now it's like $400. -$600 for a plan that covers almost nothing.
That’s been the argument has used for years. Without the US premium they couldn’t fund research. Even though they spend more on marketing. I’ll be shocked if prices actually come down, but this is what should have happened instead of medicare part b. Or at least as part of it. Biden tried to do it for medicare and got sued in 2023: “The pharmaceutical industry's largest lobbying group and two other organizations sued the Biden administration over Medicare's new powers to slash drug prices for seniors under the Inflation Reduction Act.” https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/06/21/phrma-sues-biden-administration-over-medicare-drug-negotiations-.html He did reach agreement on 10 drugs again for medicare that is supposed to go into effect in 2026: “After months of negotiations with manufacturers, list prices will be reduced by hundreds — in some cases, thousands — of dollars for 30-day supplies of popular drugs used by millions of people on Medicare, including blood thinners, diabetes drugs and blood cancer medications. The reductions, which range between 38% and 79%, take effect in 2026.” https://apnews.com/article/biden-drug-prices-medicare-prescriptions-34886d6f362c242be268c05d5efd5411 Trump did cancel some if Biden’s plans to reduce costs, but I don’t know if it was specifically those reductions. “On Inauguration Day, January 20, 2025, Trump signed an executive order reversing initiatives aimed at reducing prescription drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid recipients, expanding the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and increasing protections for Medicaid enrollees.” https://www.ajmc.com/view/trump-reverses-some-biden-drug-pricing-initiatives-potentially-impacting-medicare-costs It wouldn’t shock me if there are some negotiations which result in the current 2026 plan. But I will be happy if it really does bring down drug prices.
So the ACA did actually curtail the rate of increase for drug prices, at least until Trump took office and gutted the program. The ACA would’ve been even more effective except several red states refused the federal subsidies that went along with it, which were intended to expand Medicaid and make ACA plans more accessible. They did this to discourage their constituents from participating in the ACA because Republicans are bad faith, party over country bastards who care more about making sure Obama didn’t get a “win” than they do about their constituents who struggle to afford health insurance.
He promised that 4 yrs ago, wrote a meaningless executive order that he never followed through with.(it takes more than the order, you have to get it approved by HHS and the drug companies have to agree to it which takes negotiations. There’s just the appearance of doing something by signing the order. And since he nixed Biden’s insulin cost cuts along with Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices down, wants to do away with Medicare/caid, & the ACA(who also has the power to negotiate w/drug CO’s) Why not start by leaving those be if he cares about our healthcare costs?
Trump, Biden, Trump, Obama, Bush Jr.... Seems like Obama is the only time in modern history that we didn't have an absolute fuck wit, and he passed ACA, which sucks pretty bad... I mean, is healthcare good now, or even better than it was in 2016?
Didn't Donald Trump and his GOP goons hate the ACA when it came out?