ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[SomeGuy]

Come on, man, glue has got to come from somewhere! 


Whatever you want.

[Marypoza]

(01-30-2017, 12:26 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-29-2017, 04:06 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:If you intend to only use the scientific meaning of the term 'fact', then nothing will measure-up and all discussion will hedged to the point of bland incoherence.  But you asked, so I'll answer:

The scientific meaning of the word "fact"?  The bit this was in direct response to was your use of the word "correlation".  The correlation between over-the-counter supplements and FDA-approved drugs' what?  I still don't think you know what the word means.

The correlation is the between the levels of oversight ... but then, you know that.

\SomeGuy Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:Drugs v Dietary Supplements: Testing and approvals for use are required of drugs.  That guarantees noting, but it does force an evidence trail that can be used to sue. Even Big Pharma hates law suits, so there is some degree of self regulation of both efficacy and quality control.  None of that applies to dietary supplements, which are offered for sale as commercial, not medical, items.

Dietary supplements are regulated under the FDA.  So is food, for that matter (between the FDA, the USDA, etc.).  What does this prove?

No, they are not really monitored beyond the standard of doing no harm.  Efficacy is never evaluated.

\SomeGuy Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:Mechanic v. Physician:  The physician has to pass medical boards to practice, and has responsibilities that are enforceable.  That's why they have malpractice insurance.  The same self regulation argument applies here.  A mechanic has none of those.

So do hairdressers.  There are certifications available for mechanics as well.  They can also be held liable if poor repair work leads to an accident.    So what?

Again, it's a difference of degree.  Hairdressers are licensed as capable, and expected to know some basic hygiene.  That's it.

\SomeGuy Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:In the social sphere, and even in some scientific applications, the preponderance of evidence is fully adequate to claim "proof".  Ask any judge.

This is not a court room.  An opinion that a doctor is or isn't similar to a mechanic is just that, an opinion.  Similar to a mechanic how?

It's not a court room, but it's not a laboratory either.  Preponderance of the evidence is a decent standard for social issues that are not cut-and-dry.  You can disagree if you wish.

And yes, a doctor is not infallible, and a mechanic is held to a standard too.  The two are not equal.  There are three areas where people are unwilling to accept error: life and death, their freedom and liberty, and their money.  So doctors, lawyers and accountants get special scrutiny ... as they should.

-- keep in mind it's called the Art of Medicene 4 a reason....

[David Horn]

(01-30-2017, 07:38 PM)nihilist moron Wrote: As analogies go, "mechanic" would be a better one than "fireman" for most physicians. With an exception for emergency medicine, which hospitals by law must provide before sending an unfunded patient elsewhere.

OK, but not exactly the topic being discussed.

[Eric the Green]

(01-30-2017, 01:34 PM)David Horn Wrote: I think we've beaten this poor horse to death.  We won't agree, so let's call a truce, and get on with other things. 

There must be a lot of dead horses around here. And on most other forums. Piles and piles of them.

[Marypoza]

Bernie kicked butt


http://observer.com/2017/02/bernie-sande...tion-loss/

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/07/b...-cruz.html

[David Horn]

(01-31-2017, 02:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-30-2017, 01:34 PM)David Horn Wrote: I think we've beaten this poor horse to death.  We won't agree, so let's call a truce, and get on with other things. 

There must be a lot of dead horses around here. And on most other forums. Piles and piles of them.

Only one horse need apply:

[Marypoza]

(02-09-2017, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-31-2017, 02:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(01-30-2017, 01:34 PM)David Horn Wrote: I think we've beaten this poor horse to death.  We won't agree, so let's call a truce, and get on with other things. 

There must be a lot of dead horses around here. And on most other forums. Piles and piles of them.

Only one horse need apply:

- wtf??!!!!!?? What is that? A Templar horse?

[David Horn]

(02-09-2017, 11:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote: Only one horse need apply:

- wtf??!!!!!?? What is that? A Templar horse?

It's a sculpture by David Černý.  All his stuff is interesting.  This one is in Prague, and it's King Wenceslas on a dead horse.

[Marypoza]

(02-09-2017, 02:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote: Only one horse need apply:

- wtf??!!!!!?? What is that? A Templar horse?

It's a sculpture by David Černý.  All his stuff is interesting.  This one is in Prague, and it's King Wenceslas on a dead horse.

-- Good King Wenceslaus looked out, riding on a dead horse.....

yeah l can dig it

[Eric the Green]

(02-09-2017, 02:16 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 02:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote: Only one horse need apply:

- wtf??!!!!!?? What is that? A Templar horse?

It's a sculpture by David Černý.  All his stuff is interesting.  This one is in Prague, and it's King Wenceslas on a dead horse.

-- Good King Wenceslaus looked out, riding on a dead horse.....

yeah l can dig it

It would seem like this sculpture is very relevant. It seems to me we have a new king who has ridden many dead horses right into the White House. And is now beating on us all.

[Eric the Green]

#2 on Trending
Obamacare: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver

[Ragnarök_62]

(02-09-2017, 02:21 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 02:16 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 02:12 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:26 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-09-2017, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote: Only one horse need apply:

- wtf??!!!!!?? What is that? A Templar horse?

It's a sculpture by David Černý.  All his stuff is interesting.  This one is in Prague, and it's King Wenceslas on a dead horse.

-- Good King Wenceslaus looked out, riding on a dead horse.....

yeah l can dig it

It would seem like this sculpture is very relevant. It seems to me we have a new king who has ridden many dead horses right into the White House. And is now beating on us all.

Ahem......   He's not riding the horse.... He's riding the horse's member.

[Eric the Green]

John Oliver's analysis is very good in the video above. Here's a good PBS report on what repeal and replace ACA would mean for hospitals, patients and the health care industry.

Hospitals worry an ACA repeal could harm their financial health
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/hospitals...al-health/





JUDY WOODRUFF: Now what hospitals fear about the possible costs of repealing and replacing the health care law.

Efforts by President Trump and congressional Republicans to unravel the Affordable Care Act are unnerving many hospital executives. They say they’re worried about big changes to their bottom line, particularly after they overhauled how care is delivered in response to the health law’s rewards and penalties.

While Republicans try to figure out their game plan, special correspondent Sarah Varney reports on how hospitals are bracing for the unknown.

This story was produced in collaboration with our partner Kaiser Health News.

SARAH VARNEY: Driving to work amid the barren winter fields in Northern Illinois, Cathie Chapman is worried about the future. She lost her job after a nearby rural hospital closed.

CATHIE CHAPMAN, Perry Memorial Hospital: I was really lucky. I found another great hospital to work in with a wonderful group of people who deliver high-quality care. But not everyone was as lucky.

SARAH VARNEY: And as Republicans work to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, she wonders if it might happen again. Now she runs the pharmacy at Perry Memorial in Princeton, Illinois. And she’s watching the Republicans’ repeal efforts warily.

CATHIE CHAPMAN: I think everybody who works in health care now feels a little uneasy. Even if you’re a large, profitable hospital, we don’t know what’s coming around the corner, and how it will affect us.

SARAH VARNEY: Rural hospitals have long struggled to stay open: They have far fewer patients and thin margins. Dozens have closed across the country in recent years, mostly in states that didn’t expand Medicaid.

But, in Illinois, which did extend Medicaid to nearly all poor adults, patients at Perry Memorial have gained coverage under the Affordable Care Act and many hospitals have found firmer footing.

But Annette Schnabel, the hospital’s CEO, says if large numbers of people lose their insurance under the Republicans’ replacement, the hospital’s finances and its patients would be at risk, especially after the hospital has invested so much money and time in complying with the health law.

ANNETTE SCHNABEL, CEO, Perry Memorial Hospital: We have spent the last six years gearing up towards everything that we were responsible for doing in the ACA. And the idea of we might have to totally go a different direction or how will we do that, it’s going to take a lot of work. There’s a lot of effort that is going into this.

SARAH VARNEY: And for some hospitals to survive or break even, it will require Congress to restore billions of dollars in funding that kept hospitals afloat before the law took effect.

Hospitals made a high-stakes trade when they signed on to the Affordable Care Act. They agreed to massive cuts in federal aid that defrayed the cost of caring for the uninsured. In exchange, they would gain tens of millions of newly insured customers. Now that deal is in jeopardy, and hospital executives are anxiously waiting to see what comes next.

Stroger Hospital of Cook County, in Chicago, is one of the busiest hospitals in the nation. Its emergency and trauma teams have inspired shows like “E.R.” and “Chicago Med” and handle most of the city’s gunshot victims.

The vast majority of patients here used to be uninsured, and the county-run hospital struggled to take care of all of their medical and mental health needs. Those patients now have Medicaid coverage because of the Affordable Care Act, and the Cook County hospital system has gained $200 million in new revenue to cover their services, breaking even for the first time ever.

DR. JAY SHANNON, CEO, Cook County Health and Hospitals System: We have no interest in slipping back in what we have been able to do.

SARAH VARNEY: Dr. Jay Shannon is CEO of the Cook County Health and Hospitals System.

DR. JAY SHANNON: We’re not able to do the kind of work that we do today with good will alone. Our staff are not a volunteer staff. We can’t get I.V. fluids and medical equipment on credit and a wink and a nod.

SARAH VARNEY: Two hospital trade groups, the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals, have warned of — quote — “an unprecedented public health crisis” if the law is hastily scuttled.

They say if Congress repeals the law entirely and 20 million people are kicked off their insurance, hospitals will lose $166 billion in Medicaid payments alone in the next decade and face much steeper losses if certain Medicare cuts that were part of the law aren’t restored.

In Chicago, limo driver Jerold Exson is one of those patients who could lose coverage and have his hospital bills once again go unpaid. As of now, the hospital helps enroll low-income adults like Exson into Medicaid. In 2014, he was shot nearly a dozen times in a case of mistaken identity.

His medical care is covered now, and the hospital can provide follow-up surgeries, physical therapy and mental health treatment that were often off-limits to the uninsured.

NATALIA RUIZ: How are you feeling today? I see you. You’re kind of down.

JEROLD EXSON, Chicago: I’m not as edgy when I’m, like, driving or out in public, around a lot of people.

SARAH VARNEY: Exson sees clinical psychologist Natalia Ruiz to manage the after-effects of gun violence.

JEROLD EXSON: I had that episode where I was driving that time, and the little rock hit the window, and it kind of sent me into a tailspin.

SARAH VARNEY: The health law also shifted the business model for U.S. hospitals. It offered them financial incentives to move away from expensive E.R. visits to primary care and managing chronic conditions.

Earl Williams Sr. has finally brought his diabetes under control. He’s diligent about exercising, taking his medication, and seeing his doctor.

EARL WILLIAMS SR., Chicago: My sugars was in the 200s. They’re now from 80 to 120, where they’re supposed to be. Then they took some of the medication away because I have maintained due to the teachings of my doctors and the staff here at Woodlawn Hospital.

SARAH VARNEY: Before the Affordable Care Act, hospitals had little incentive to reduce E.R. visits, especially from Medicare patients who generate a lot of revenue.

At the University of Chicago Medicine, an academic medical center, Dr. Kenneth Polonsky says that if those incentives are rescinded and patients forgo preventive care, they will clog up already strained emergency rooms.

DR. KENNETH POLONSKY, University of Chicago Medicine: We will go back to a very frustrating time, where people had limited options for health care because of inability to get health insurance.

SARAH VARNEY: The uncertainty is also roiling county governments, which often fund medical care for the poor. The burden on local taxpayers to fund the Cook County Health System has dropped by $300 million since the health law went into effect.

President of the Cook County Board of Commissioners Toni Preckwinkle says repealing the law could force local governments to raise taxes.

TONI PRECKWINKLE, President, Cook County Board of Commissioners: For us, it’s a $300 million hole in our budget. So, there aren’t a lot of options, other than raising more revenue. It’s a nightmare for us.

SARAH VARNEY: She says the county and the country have been making progress, and repeal is a step backward.

In Waukegan, Illinois, near the Wisconsin border…

BARBARA MARTIN, CEO, Vista Health System: What we’re entering here is our new open heart surgery suite.

SARAH VARNEY: Vista Health System CEO Barbara Martin says with more insured patients and additional reimbursement from the health law, she’s invested in new equipment and hired hundreds of new employees across Vista’s two for-profit hospitals.

She says, if the 900,000 Illinois residents who gained insurance under the law lose coverage and hospital revenue drops suddenly, hospital executives estimate 95,000 jobs could be lost.

BARBARA MARTIN: That could just be catastrophic to the state and catastrophic, not to only Vista, to all hospitals across the country.

SARAH VARNEY: But Edmund Haislmaier, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, says U.S. taxpayers already spend too much on health care.

Haislmaier, who was a member of President Trump’s transition team on health policy, says communities and states and local governments shouldn’t rely on hospitals to create new jobs and fill their budget holes.

EDMUND HAISLMAIER, Heritage Foundation: Hospitals in particular have become economic development projects. If you’re paying tax dollars for a public program like Medicare or Medicaid and you’re paying private insurance premiums, this is all what makes health care unaffordable.

SARAH VARNEY: More than a dozen top Republican lawmakers declined to be interviewed for this story. But a spokesperson for Senator Lamar Alexander, chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, said in a statement that he is listening to hospitals, doctors, patients, governors and others as they draft the replacement plan.

Back in Chicago, that all adds up to more questions for patients like Earl Williams.

EARL WILLIAMS SR.: Am I going to have insurance in a month or two?

SARAH VARNEY: Questions doctors are struggling to answer.

MAN: I’m going to give it to you straight. And that is, it’s likely that it’s going to change. It’s not going to be the same.

SARAH VARNEY: With President Trump and congressional Republicans now saying a final replacement plan may not be ready until later this year, the uncertainty is likely to linger.

For the PBS NewsHour and Kaiser Health News, I’m Sarah Varney in Chicago.

[Bob Butler 54]

While the tread title gives the progressives a dilemma, it seems the Republicans have all sorts of problems too.  My feeling is that when Obama put together his health care plan, the Republicans cared more about making Obama and his efforts look really bad than they did about providing health care. As a result, a lot of their base thinks a lot of ideas which might be necessary to decent health care must be repealed.  Their base is ready to vote anyone out who doesn't agree.

Now, I agree Obamacare isn't perfect.  It needs to be tuned.  Hillary was right, though.  You start with as is and tune it rather than starting from scratch.  A good sized chunk of the Republican Base and the folks they elected won't be open to this.

It seems that the less ideological Republicans and the Democrats might have to work together.

[Marypoza]

(02-28-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 12:48 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: While the tread title gives the progressives a dilemma, it seems the Republicans have all sorts of problems too.  My feeling is that when Obama put together his health care plan, the Republicans cared more about making Obama and his efforts look really bad than they did about providing health care. As a result, a lot of their base thinks a lot of ideas which might be necessary to decent health care must be repealed.  Their base is ready to vote anyone out who doesn't agree.

Now, I agree Obamacare isn't perfect.  It needs to be tuned.  Hillary was right, though.  You start with as is and tune it rather than starting from scratch.  A good sized chunk of the Republican Base and the folks they elected won't be open to this.

It seems that the less ideological Republicans and the Democrats might have to work together.

Obama-care is essentially Romney-care 2.0.

Anyone on the Right or Left who cannot face this fact is in denial of reality.

I agree, make it better. Don't trash it.

-- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

[Eric the Green]

(03-01-2017, 03:37 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 12:48 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: While the tread title gives the progressives a dilemma, it seems the Republicans have all sorts of problems too.  My feeling is that when Obama put together his health care plan, the Republicans cared more about making Obama and his efforts look really bad than they did about providing health care. As a result, a lot of their base thinks a lot of ideas which might be necessary to decent health care must be repealed.  Their base is ready to vote anyone out who doesn't agree.

Now, I agree Obamacare isn't perfect.  It needs to be tuned.  Hillary was right, though.  You start with as is and tune it rather than starting from scratch.  A good sized chunk of the Republican Base and the folks they elected won't be open to this.

It seems that the less ideological Republicans and the Democrats might have to work together.

Obama-care is essentially Romney-care 2.0.

Anyone on the Right or Left who cannot face this fact is in denial of reality.

I agree, make it better. Don't trash it.

-- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

Unfortunately, if it goes, it will only be replaced by a private Republican system. Obamacare was a step in the right direction, and it could have been changed to make it better. Given America's mindset, single payer may be decades away, at least. Unless the voters wise up in the 2020s.

Or, I suppose, since Medicare was passed in the 1960s, perhaps single payer will come in the late 2040s Awakening, when Uranus the rebel planet returns to Virgo the sign of health, where it was in the sixties.

Real progress is rare in America, so it's wise not to expect too much, and to settle for what we can get.

[Marypoza]

(03-01-2017, 05:11 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 03:37 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 12:48 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: While the tread title gives the progressives a dilemma, it seems the Republicans have all sorts of problems too.  My feeling is that when Obama put together his health care plan, the Republicans cared more about making Obama and his efforts look really bad than they did about providing health care. As a result, a lot of their base thinks a lot of ideas which might be necessary to decent health care must be repealed.  Their base is ready to vote anyone out who doesn't agree.

Now, I agree Obamacare isn't perfect.  It needs to be tuned.  Hillary was right, though.  You start with as is and tune it rather than starting from scratch.  A good sized chunk of the Republican Base and the folks they elected won't be open to this.

It seems that the less ideological Republicans and the Democrats might have to work together.

Obama-care is essentially Romney-care 2.0.

Anyone on the Right or Left who cannot face this fact is in denial of reality.

I agree, make it better. Don't trash it.

-- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

Unfortunately, if it goes, it will only be replaced by a private Republican system.Obamacare was

-- supposed to get rid of the single payor argument for good. "Oh look! We got this crap! Who needs single payor?"
The repugs will come up with something even more crappy, which will just beg for single payor

The most insidious thing about obummercrap, which nobody seems to want to talk about, is that it forces you to buy something whether you can afford to or not (which is why most folx have these crappy plans with sky high deductibles, so they are basically still fronting their own health care, except now they are also throwing away $x/month to the insurance companies, but l digress) This sets a dangerous precedent. For instance: a common item that many budget planners tell folx in need of budget help to cut is cable. Given these Owellian times we are entering, what if Big Brother, um l mean Congress passes a law that everybody is required to have cable/internet, whether they can afford it or not. Since most cable companies are also internet providers, well, big windfall dontcha think? What if ppl were required to have a phone, & not just your cheapo run of the mill phone, but say an i-shit? There was a thread awhile back where souped up hitech rides were being discussed & l said l would be driving under the radar in my beat up old school rides. M&L said no, l would be ride sharing, or hitching rides or some such, iow, l would not be allowed to drive my low tech old schools & neither would anybody else be allowed to drive theirs.  Keep in mind, nice cars, cable, i-shits.. like health care these are things most of us want, but not everybody can afford. Then Congress passes laws forcing everybody to buy them  

Which is why, even tho l would much rather see obummercrap razed to the ground, l would be happy if the Donald simply makes it optional. The ppl who are getting their refunds taken from them are the ones that need it the most

Eric Wrote: Given America's mindset, single payer may be decades away, at least. Unless the voters wise up in the 2020s.

-- single payor could emerge from the 4 T

Eric Wrote:Or, I suppose, since Medicare was passed in the 1960s, perhaps single payer will come in the late 2040s Awakening, when Uranus the rebel planet returns to Virgo the sign of health, where it was in the sixties.

Real progress is rare in America, so it's wise not to expect too much, and to settle for what we can get.

-- makes sense. The Millies, like the GIs are a civic generation, so once they are running things they will probably lower the Medicare age to 0, if it hasn't been already

[Eric the Green]

(03-01-2017, 01:18 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 05:11 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 03:37 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 12:48 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: While the tread title gives the progressives a dilemma, it seems the Republicans have all sorts of problems too.  My feeling is that when Obama put together his health care plan, the Republicans cared more about making Obama and his efforts look really bad than they did about providing health care. As a result, a lot of their base thinks a lot of ideas which might be necessary to decent health care must be repealed.  Their base is ready to vote anyone out who doesn't agree.

Now, I agree Obamacare isn't perfect.  It needs to be tuned.  Hillary was right, though.  You start with as is and tune it rather than starting from scratch.  A good sized chunk of the Republican Base and the folks they elected won't be open to this.

It seems that the less ideological Republicans and the Democrats might have to work together.

Obama-care is essentially Romney-care 2.0.

Anyone on the Right or Left who cannot face this fact is in denial of reality.

I agree, make it better. Don't trash it.

-- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

Unfortunately, if it goes, it will only be replaced by a private Republican system.Obamacare was

-- supposed to get rid of the single payor argument for good. "Oh look! We got this crap! Who needs single payor?"
The repugs will come up with something even more crappy, which will just beg for single payor

Maybe. Unless people were to say, we've got ACA, but it's not good enough; we need further progress toward single payer.

Quote:The most insidious thing about obummercrap, which nobody seems to want to talk about, is that it forces you to buy something whether you can afford to or not (which is why most folx have these crappy plans with sky high deductibles, so they are basically still fronting their own health care, except now they are also throwing away $x/month to the insurance companies, but l digress) This sets a dangerous precedent. For instance: a common item that many budget planners tell folx in need of budget help to cut is cable. Given these Owellian times we are entering, what if Big Brother, um l mean Congress passes a law that everybody is required to have cable/internet, whether they can afford it or not. Since most cable companies are also internet providers, well, big windfall dontcha think? What if ppl were required to have a phone, & not just your cheapo run of the mill phone, but say an i-shit? There was a thread awhile back where souped up hitech rides were being discussed & l said l would be driving under the radar in my beat up old school rides. M&L said no, l would be ride sharing, or hitching rides or some such, iow, l would not be allowed to drive my low tech old schools & neither would anybody else be allowed to drive theirs.  Keep in mind, nice cars, cable, i-shits.. like health care these are things most of us want, but not everybody can afford. Then Congress passes laws forcing everybody to buy them  

Which is why, even tho l would much rather see obummercrap razed to the ground, l would be happy if the Donald simply makes it optional. The ppl who are getting their refunds taken from them are the ones that need it the most

Eric Wrote: Given America's mindset, single payer may be decades away, at least. Unless the voters wise up in the 2020s.

-- single payer could emerge from the 4 T

Eric Wrote:Or, I suppose, since Medicare was passed in the 1960s, perhaps single payer will come in the late 2040s Awakening, when Uranus the rebel planet returns to Virgo the sign of health, where it was in the sixties.

Real progress is rare in America, so it's wise not to expect too much, and to settle for what we can get.

-- makes sense. The Millies, like the GIs are a civic generation, so once they are running things they will probably lower the Medicare age to 0, if it hasn't been already

The Donald does nothing right, ever, or at all. Or as George Carlin would say, he doesn't "care about you, at all, at all, at all!"

No, Obamacare cannot work without the mandate. Making it optional destroys the funding for it. The concept of pooled resources eludes Republicans and other Obamacare critics. That was what is supposed to bring costs down. But medicaid also brings costs down because otherwise healthcare providers have to pay these bills. Red states don't provide Medicaid, so that's where costs are rising the most, and naturally the ignorant red state voters can only see the rising costs and vote for their premiums to skyrocket instead of rising.

The Republican plan simply amounts to trying to reduce costs by covering fewer people. The effect will be rising costs for everyone who pays for it.

Health care is not cable TV; it's a necessity.

But yes, the late 2040s makes sense; I forgot to mention that the previous Uranus in Virgo time was when Medicare was passed in the mid-60s. Uranus also conjunct or opposite Pluto both times too, of course.

[Marypoza]

(03-01-2017, 02:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 01:18 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 05:11 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 03:37 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 01:15 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Obama-care is essentially Romney-care 2.0.

Anyone on the Right or Left who cannot face this fact is in denial of reality.

I agree, make it better. Don't trash it.

-- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

Unfortunately, if it goes, it will only be replaced by a private Republican system.Obamacare was

-- supposed to get rid of the single payor argument for good. "Oh look! We got this crap! Who needs single payor?"
The repugs will come up with something even more crappy, which will just beg for single payor

Maybe. Unless people were to say, we've got ACA, but it's not good enough; we need further progress toward single payer.

Quote:The most insidious thing about obummercrap, which nobody seems to want to talk about, is that it forces you to buy something whether you can afford to or not (which is why most folx have these crappy plans with sky high deductibles, so they are basically still fronting their own health care, except now they are also throwing away $x/month to the insurance companies, but l digress) This sets a dangerous precedent. For instance: a common item that many budget planners tell folx in need of budget help to cut is cable. Given these Owellian times we are entering, what if Big Brother, um l mean Congress passes a law that everybody is required to have cable/internet, whether they can afford it or not. Since most cable companies are also internet providers, well, big windfall dontcha think? What if ppl were required to have a phone, & not just your cheapo run of the mill phone, but say an i-shit? There was a thread awhile back where souped up hitech rides were being discussed & l said l would be driving under the radar in my beat up old school rides. M&L said no, l would be ride sharing, or hitching rides or some such, iow, l would not be allowed to drive my low tech old schools & neither would anybody else be allowed to drive theirs.  Keep in mind, nice cars, cable, i-shits.. like health care these are things most of us want, but not everybody can afford. Then Congress passes laws forcing everybody to buy them  

Which is why, even tho l would much rather see obummercrap razed to the ground, l would be happy if the Donald simply makes it optional. The ppl who are getting their refunds taken from them are the ones that need it the most

Eric Wrote: Given America's mindset, single payer may be decades away, at least. Unless the voters wise up in the 2020s.

-- single payer could emerge from the 4 T

Eric Wrote:Or, I suppose, since Medicare was passed in the 1960s, perhaps single payer will come in the late 2040s Awakening, when Uranus the rebel planet returns to Virgo the sign of health, where it was in the sixties.

Real progress is rare in America, so it's wise not to expect too much, and to settle for what we can get.

-- makes sense. The Millies, like the GIs are a civic generation, so once they are running things they will probably lower the Medicare age to 0, if it hasn't been already

The Donald does nothing right, ever, or at all. Or as George Carlin would say, he doesn't "care about you, at all, at all, at all!"

-- agreed, but that's beside the point l was making

Eric Wrote:....yada yada..... 

Health care is not cable TV; it's a necessity.

-- my point is if the Govt can force you to buy 1 thing, what to stop it from forcing you to buy other stuff? I agree health care is a right, a necessity, & l think if the Govt is going to insist on everybody having it then they should provide it instead forcing ppl to pony up hard earned $ into some f-ing ponzi scheme     but hey l'm funny like that

Eric Wrote:But yes, the late 2040s makes sense; I forgot to mention that the previous Uranus in Virgo time was when Medicare was passed in the mid-60s. Uranus also conjunct or opposite Pluto both times too, of course.

-- no you didn't forget. Hopefully, the Medicare age will be lowered sooner than the 2040s however

[Eric the Green]

(03-01-2017, 03:44 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 02:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 01:18 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 05:11 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-01-2017, 03:37 AM)Marypoza Wrote: -- this piss pos is standing in the way of true health reform. It needs to go

Unfortunately, if it goes, it will only be replaced by a private Republican system.Obamacare was

-- supposed to get rid of the single payor argument for good. "Oh look! We got this crap! Who needs single payor?"
The repugs will come up with something even more crappy, which will just beg for single payor

Maybe. Unless people were to say, we've got ACA, but it's not good enough; we need further progress toward single payer.

Quote:The most insidious thing about obummercrap, which nobody seems to want to talk about, is that it forces you to buy something whether you can afford to or not (which is why most folx have these crappy plans with sky high deductibles, so they are basically still fronting their own health care, except now they are also throwing away $x/month to the insurance companies, but l digress) This sets a dangerous precedent. For instance: a common item that many budget planners tell folx in need of budget help to cut is cable. Given these Owellian times we are entering, what if Big Brother, um l mean Congress passes a law that everybody is required to have cable/internet, whether they can afford it or not. Since most cable companies are also internet providers, well, big windfall dontcha think? What if ppl were required to have a phone, & not just your cheapo run of the mill phone, but say an i-shit? There was a thread awhile back where souped up hitech rides were being discussed & l said l would be driving under the radar in my beat up old school rides. M&L said no, l would be ride sharing, or hitching rides or some such, iow, l would not be allowed to drive my low tech old schools & neither would anybody else be allowed to drive theirs.  Keep in mind, nice cars, cable, i-shits.. like health care these are things most of us want, but not everybody can afford. Then Congress passes laws forcing everybody to buy them  

Which is why, even tho l would much rather see obummercrap razed to the ground, l would be happy if the Donald simply makes it optional. The ppl who are getting their refunds taken from them are the ones that need it the most

Eric Wrote: Given America's mindset, single payer may be decades away, at least. Unless the voters wise up in the 2020s.

-- single payer could emerge from the 4 T

Eric Wrote:Or, I suppose, since Medicare was passed in the 1960s, perhaps single payer will come in the late 2040s Awakening, when Uranus the rebel planet returns to Virgo the sign of health, where it was in the sixties.

Real progress is rare in America, so it's wise not to expect too much, and to settle for what we can get.

-- makes sense. The Millies, like the GIs are a civic generation, so once they are running things they will probably lower the Medicare age to 0, if it hasn't been already

The Donald does nothing right, ever, or at all. Or as George Carlin would say, he doesn't "care about you, at all, at all, at all!"

-- agreed, but that's beside the point l was making

Well... you did say that you hoped The Donald would ditch Obama's "care." "l would be happy if the Donald simply makes it optional"

No, if HE does it, it won't be right

Quote:

Quote:Health care is not cable TV; it's a necessity.

-- my point is if the Govt can force you to buy 1 thing, what to stop it from forcing you to buy other stuff? I agree health care is a right, a necessity, & l think if the Govt is going to insist on everybody having it then they should provide it instead forcing ppl to pony up hard earned $ into some f-ing ponzi scheme     but hey l'm funny like that

That would be better, but we still have to pay one way or another.

Quote:

Eric Wrote:But yes, the late 2040s makes sense; I forgot to mention that the previous Uranus in Virgo time was when Medicare was passed in the mid-60s. Uranus also conjunct or opposite Pluto both times too, of course.

-- no you didn't forget. Hopefully, the Medicare age will be lowered sooner than the 2040s however

Millennials--- VOTE! Learn to be civics.....