@JackPosobiec@JackPosobiec This is one of the most ignorant and illâinformed speculative statements one could make about this situation. The Chinese have zero ability to project naval force.
Also, please get your teeth properly cleaned; in person, they look and smell rotten and decayed.
An Unbiased Look at Obamacare: Who It Helped, Who It Hurt, and Why It Was Built This Way
The chart showing the surge in health insurance stocks since 2010 tells a deeper story about how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) reshaped American healthcare. UnitedHealth is up more than 1,100%, Humana nearly 900%, and every major insurer has multiplied many times over. This is what happens when a law redirects risk, money, and responsibility from markets to managed intermediaries guaranteed by government.
How Obamacare Changed the System
The ACA was a hybrid model that empowered private insurers under federal supervision. It banned pricing based on health (medical underwriting) and required âcommunity rating,â meaning healthy and sick customers pay roughly the same. To prevent insurer losses, the government built stabilizersâŚrisk corridors, reinsurance, and cost sharing subsidies, that shifted volatility to taxpayers.
Once that risk was socialized, insurers became more like regulated utilitiesâŚearning predictable margins, insulated from loss, and subsidized by public dollars. Wall Street rewarded the stability, and the stock chart tells the rest of the story.
Who Benefited And Who Didnât
Winners:
â˘Large insurers that had the scale and lobbying power to shape complex rules in their favor.
â˘Big employers and unions that offloaded unpredictable healthcare liabilities, replacing them with fixed penalties or taxes.
â˘Compliance and technology firms that profited from handling new regulatory and billing complexity.
Losers:
â˘Middle income households just above subsidy thresholdsâŚtoo ârichâ for help, too âpoorâ for comfort saw steep premium hikes and rising deductibles.
â˘Small businesses and independent workers lost leverage as coverage options shrank.
â˘Local doctors and small providers were squeezed by insurer consolidation and lower reimbursements.
The middle class, the very group the ACA was supposed to protect ended up subsidizing everyone else while insurers, large corporations, and contractors quietly won.
Why It Was Built This Way
Many assume Obamacare failed because premiums rose and choices vanished. But that assumes it was meant to cut costs. It wasnât. It was meant to reassign them. The ACA was structured to gradually shift healthcare obligations from employers and individuals to a government linked system too embedded to unwind.
The 2,700 page law created over 150 agencies and locked in multi year funding streams beyond the reach of annual budgets. Thatâs why even during shutdowns, ACA programs continue running. Every administration since has promised to fix it but all have ended up managing it instead.
The Structural Flaw
Obamacare declared healthcare a right but delivered it through corporations accountable to shareholders. That contradiction guarantees rising costs. When government guarantees revenue and absorbs losses, competition fades. Premiums rise, deductibles grow, and taxpayers carry the ultimate risk.
Thatâs why health insurance stocks soared while households felt squeezed. The law stabilized the system but for insurers, not patients.
Why Itâs So Hard to Fix
The ACA canât be repealed like a normal law. Its funding renews automatically through mandatory appropriations. Even if Congress cut parts of it, much of the system would survive. The only realistic fix is slow reform by reducing subsidies, simplifying rules, and restoring real pricing and choice.
The Takeaway
Obamacare performed as designed. It shifted healthcare costs off private balance sheets and onto the public one, enriching insurers and stabilizing markets at the expense of the middle class. It turned healthcare into a political utility, too profitable to reform and too entrenched to fail.
When Washington defines something as a right but routes it through profit driven intermediaries, the result isnât equality, itâs consolidation. Obamacare didnât fail. It succeeded just not for the people paying the premiums. @mcuban
@gearedandready@WallStreetApes Go to the exchange, as spouse and dependents can be higher premium than 9.02%, but without his subsidy, but still counting him towards the number of people in the tax household, the premium subsidies will be very low.
@NickTimiraos@NickTimiraos did you copy this unedited from Jayâs email to you, or did you change a few words to make you feel like youâre a âjournalistâ? Why not have Jerome just say these things publicly instead of hiding behind his stenographer lackey at the WSJ @NickTimiraos
@RandPaul Look at the 10-year yield - when that reaches 2% or lower and we have refiâd the $7Tn in debt thatâs due in the next year the mission will have been accomplished
@AndreasSteno@suryakane While the Euro Zone may have GDP 20x Russiaâs they have no money or will to fight. Youâre also talking about a group of countries built around socialist policies of a welfare state. Care to make a wager that European countries wonât follow through?
@AndreasSteno The point is transparency. People can watch and then judge for themselves what they think. Perish the thought we let individuals decide for themselves. đ¤Ą
@CilComLFC@tizintest Unfortunately for them, if these polls are correct, they wonât have an outright majority and therefore no one will form a coalition govt with Afd
@kinsellawarren Sadly, Trudeau and others on Europe could have been cooperative with Trump in his first term but instead they mocked him. You are now entering the find out phase of fck around.
@kinsellawarren Maple syrup? Yea definitely. Not sure thatâs going to save your economy when Canada in inextricably tied to US consumption. You have no where else to go and I guess youâll just need to find out the hard way.
@berlin_bridge Good luck with your European troop deployments. Iâll bet you $1,000, or 957 euros that will never happen. The people of Europe wonât stand for it and itâs sad that you donât know.
@SantiagoAuFund@SantiagoAuFund hypothetically would bullion âacquiredâ from a toppled gov be moved to ft. Knox? Or would the acquiring agency keep it offsite for their own purposes?