>>>Flag on the field....Argument from Intimidation...
>
>I think you mean ad hominem, not intimidation. In fairness, you're quoting somebody about the ACA who has a "repeal Obamacare" section on his website.
>
>>>The numbers come from the actuarial and are available online
>
>PWC has had quite a few things to say about the ACA. Reporters et al seem not to have noticed that PWC decreased their premium increase estimate to 7% average and has removed Arizona's reported 50% increase. Also read the fine print- some states only report bids for >10% increase, such as Louisana, which skews overall figures. Also note that these figures make no reference to subsidies. And people need to compare like with like: if increases are caused by compulsory better coverage, that's like saying that the cost of motor vehicles has risen because you aren't allowed to drive around old dungers any more.

Another way to interpret it is that the compulsory coverage opens up more avenues for patients to be fleeced. The difference in prescribed drug prices across the globe speaks volumes to the fact that insurance coverage puts very cross filters on the free market price adjustements (including the sometimes heavy handed way insurances force price reductions!). Not saying that nothing will trickle down into better care for patients, but to state that it will benefit the insured almost totally by providing more up to care stuff is quite blue eyed IMO

;-)