ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[Eric the Green]

(03-28-2017, 07:38 AM)Snowflake Wrote:

(03-28-2017, 04:24 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-28-2017, 12:35 AM)Snowflake Wrote:

(03-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-27-2017, 07:19 PM)Snowflake Wrote: Who are you referring to as a 'bimbo'?

Just a typical Drump image to contrast with your amazing claim that Drump "landed on his feet." ha ha ha

Yeah, ha ha ha.  It's fine to not like the president, but
you had to go and trash the First Lady, too? #Gutless

sorry, I don't use twitter, so I guess the hashtag will go unrecognized. To me # still means "number"

I don't know if I was trashing her specifically; Trump will go after whichever bimbo he wants, whether he's married or not. I was trashing Trump.

Yes you were.  And you can't even admit it.  Like I said.  You're gutless.

No, I don't admit it. But then, Melania has to be pretty tolerant to hook up with a bimbo banger and pussy grabber. But, that's her decision.

Quote:

EtG Wrote:Snowflake, this is a blizzard!

Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!

Me Wrote:OK.  Even if that number is correct(which I highly doubt), we're up to 7.5%.
Sorry, not worth it.

I don't know what 7.5% referred to. What DID happen under Obamacare is that many more people got coverage. The CBO says 24 million would have lost coverage under Trump/Ryancare.

Now we have Obamacare as administered by Trump's alligators. It may amount to pretty much the same thing as the Obamacare lite bill that failed. Insurance companies will be let off the hook from requirements to cover people, and there will be less funding to help people buy insurance.

Me Wrote:7.5% refers to that CBO 24M number you posted. 
At worst that's only 7.5% of the US population.

  
That's still a lot of folks. Any president who can help 24M people is doing a good thing.

But, at what cost?  What about all the people like me that are getting hurt by the PPACA?

Rich guys have to pay more. Not a big deal; it's about time.

If you are young and make too much to get subsidies, it's doubtful that Trump/Ryancare would have helped you much, if at all. Maybe premiums would have gone down years from now, but I doubt it, since under Trumpcare the insurance industry is given much more free rein. The best bet would have been to get Hillary and the Democrats in, so we'd have a government that really cares about affordable health care and could fix the ACA.

The cost of Ryancare would also have been high for middle aged people who would have had to pay 5 times more.

Quote:

EtG Wrote:Healthcare is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.

Me Wrote:Healthcare(as well as Insurance) is a 'product'.  Not the same as Social Security.
I don't want my government forcing me or anyone else to buy a product.  Period.

No, health insurance is not a product; it's the same as social security. Social insurance. I take it you are also opposed to medicare, which is also a "product" you are forced to buy, according to your definition.

Me Wrote:Yes it is.  Medicare is for 'the elderly' and 'disabled people', so it can stay.

Why should only the elderly have health care?

As far as 'the elderly' are concerned, they're not in their 'earning years'.  They paid into the
system.  That was a deal that was made before I was born, but 'a deal is a deal', so it stays.

Yes, and we need to make a new deal that covers everyone. Progress should not have stopped in 1966.

Quote:

EtG Wrote:I'd be interested in looking at a true compromise bill, even tho I favor single payer. Somebody might have some good points. Maybe the approach of paying more if you sign up late might be better than a mandate; maybe tax credits might work.

But this wasn't it. It was not even the repeal and replace with nuthin that the extremists wanted. It was a big tax break for the rich, a 5x premium increase for middle-aged insured, and a see-ya-later approach for 24 million covered by Obamacare. So that's what the people said: see ya later, Paul and Donnie!

Me Wrote:No, that's not 'what the people said'.  The Democrats pushed through the PPACA;
It should be their responsibility to fix it.  But where are they?  #IrrelevantParty

Democrats are not allowed to fix it. They have not had control of congress for over 7 years now. The Republicans have not been interested in anything except repealing Obamacare for 7 years. When given full control of the government, they give us this Obamacare lite baloney that nobody wants. I don't have much optimism that they can be the "relevant" party now and work with Democrats to create another makeshift, make-do compromise.

The product as passed in 2010 did not have a public option, and was not single payer medicare for all. So OF COURSE it was flawed. It was a compromise with the insurance industry, whose only goal is to make money by denying people coverage. As long as we aren't putting that industry out of business, our health care will be compromised, and whatever compromise is passed or proposed will be flawed.

Me Wrote:I bet you're not being screwed-over by the PPACA, are you?
Well, I sure am.  And it has to go away one way or another
(even if I have to vote Republican to help make that happen).

Obviously voting Republican is not going to make that happen, judging by results! ha ha ha

Going back to pre-Obamacare just means even more expensive health care than today. Unless you are rich, and have to pay more taxes as well as higher premiums. But then, if you're rich, you have gotten off so easy on taxes for so long that it's not a concern.

You're on Medicare, aren't you?

Yes