[zaptheimpaler]

The fundamental point is that incentives are horribly misaligned between making money and providing health care the way the current system works.

Try having a pre-existing condition before ACA - no one will insure you because you're too expensive, or your premiums go ridiculously high. Think about that. The people who need insurance the most were denied it - this is perfectly in line with market forces of course because its cheaper. The other alternative is to believe healthcare is expensive for everyone because the healthy subsidize the ill, but oops if you're ill your costs are astronomically high anyways and insurance companies will fight you tooth and nail over expensive claims, so that doesn't hold much water either.

If you want to talk data look at spending on health care vs outcomes [1]. If market forces were working so well maybe we wouldn't spend 2x - 4x more than other countries with worse life expectancy to show for it? We can argue over where the money is going but its clear theres a lot more of it going in for worse outcomes coming out than most of the world.

Honestly, seeing that if you don't see ANY contradiction or perverse misalignment between the ideal goals of a health system and the current system, you must be a very healthy guy.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/the-link-between-life-expectancy-...

[Mindless2112]

> Try having a pre-existing condition before ACA - no one will insure you because you're too expensive, or your premiums go ridiculously high.

Insurance is paying someone (the insurer) to take ownership of a risk from you (the insured) by compensating you if the risk is realized. If the risk has already been realized then, of course, no insurer will be willing to take ownership of it for less than the cost of the compensation.

The system we have today can hardly be considered "insurance".

[jrs235]

Yup. There's a very real issue of people conflating health insurance "coverage" and health care coverage. The ACA doesn't ensure care, it ensures insurance coverage. Many people may now be able "afford" insurance coverage but just as many or more still can't "afford" care.

[dragonwriter]

> There's a very real issue of people conflating health insurance "coverage" and health care coverage.

The Essential Benefits defined in the ACA guarantee that, within certain bounds, that isn't an inaccurate equivalency. It's true that every version of then Republican modifications characterized as “repeal and replace” has not only attacked insurance coverage but also made insurance coverage less likely to be care coverage, so it's certainly important to recognize the difference.