If you start a thread poor-mouthing about how you just can't swing ACA...

[Ms. Toad]

181. You're missing the point.

I was responding to a post which asserted that the only people who had a legitimate gripe were those in states where the governor refused to expand Medicaid eligibility.

I was identifying an additional class of people who have a legitimate gripe: Those who have exhorbitant medical expenses each and eery year (mostly through no fault of their own) - because that group of people have not only the (fairly reasonalbe) expense of premiums BUT they also hit the out of pocket maximum expenditures every single year.

Plans with high out of pocket maximums do not serve the population which ALWAYS has exhorbitant costs well - because the out of pocket maximums are designed to hurt but not kill - because they are so high that the average person will only hit them only perhaps one year out of 10, which makes the hurt managable. For people who hit them every single year, they are far less manageable.

What I offered WAS perspective - the perspective the poster was apparently unaware of - that there are people who are not served well by the ACA which go beyond just those in states which expanded Medicaid is not being implemented.

If you think I'm not aware that this is a major improvement, you could have taken a few seconds followed my suggestion to search and see my position on the ACA - you will find pretty much the same thing you said as an argument for why (regardless of whether it is a perfect fit) the ACA is a critical step forward. Although I had more accurate numbers aobut the cost, becuase I have researched it - and been quoting it in most posts I've made about the ACA.