Perhaps, but you can only justify that if the demand is there. In a lot of manufacturing there are significant hurdles in terms of capex. The replacement cost for one of my plants is 30MM. My depreciated cost is an order of magnitude lower. A challenger would have a tough time competing with that burden even if all the regulations were removed for both of us. However, if the demand increases the country will need more capacity and it might make sense for you to make a go for it. And the only way I can compete with China/Mexico on price is if they institute slave labor camps or impose high tarrifs. Tarrifs will create more demand for me, but the end consumer will suffer higher prices.
You buy your own insurance or through your employer? Ifnemployer, How big (employees) is your employer?
And I'd also ask if that was for exactly the same insurance or were you really hit by the minimum standards?
I've heard that individuals did better but small businesses did much worse. But that's based on acedotal stories.
The only individuals that I know of that did well were those who received big subsidies. That is why it's unsustainable.
In theory adding a bunch of previously uncovered, younger, healthy people to the pool should have reduced cost for someone in your situation. All politics aside (which is nearly impossible with this), I'm a little unsure as to why that didn't happen in practice. You're not the first person I've run into with a similar story, so I don't doubt it's true, as a markets guy I'm just curious as to exactly why.
Those are precisely the ones who didn't sign up. They paid the penalty instead. It added all the sick and pre-existing patients w/o money.