It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Trump vows ‘insurance for everybody’ in Obamacare replacement plan

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 06:52 PM
a reply to: gmoneystunt

“We’re going to have insurance for everybody,”

keyword is "Insurance" and not "healtcare" . As long as we keep a middle man such as insurance in the middle, the continued Screwing of America in healthcare will continue.

Can't say that I'm optimistic or excited about this or don't see this as a different turd.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 06:58 PM
a reply to: Phage

I don't know where your term came from.

The mentally disabled are still sterilized in order to keep from reproducing, there are even instances of court ordered abortions. This was the first institution to fall under the scope of government control, whatever term you want to call it.

The obvious conclusion will be reached under government controlled healthcare.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:02 PM
a reply to: GodEmperor

The mentally disabled are still sterilized in order to keep from reproducing, there are even instances of court ordered abortions.
Not in the US.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:15 PM
a reply to: Phage

There are some instances, and was very common during the Progressive era. You are arguing for progressive policies, which culminated in the form of Nazi Germany.

It's not common, but there are still instances, and will come around again as progressivism gains popularity.

A Massachusetts appeals court has verbally skewered a judge who ordered that a mentally ill woman have an abortion against her will even if it meant she had to be “coaxed, bribed, or even enticed” into a hospital.

More recently, California prisons are said to have authorized sterilizations of nearly 150 female inmates between 2006 and 2010. This article from the Center for Investigative reporting reveals how the state paid doctors $147,460 to perform tubal ligations that former inmates say were done under coercion.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:23 PM
a reply to: GodEmperor

Like I said, no forced sterilization or abortion.

Crystal Nguyen, a former Valley State Prison inmate who worked in the prison’s infirmary during 2007, said she often overheard medical staff asking inmates who had served multiple prison terms to agree to be sterilized.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:29 PM
a reply to: Phage

From your link,

“I was like, ‘Oh my God, that’s not right,’ ” Nguyen, 28, said. “Do they think they’re animals, and they don’t want them to breed anymore?”

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:30 PM
a reply to: GodEmperor
Yes, that was her opinion.

Now, where is the forced sterilization part?

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:33 PM
a reply to: Phage

Martin denied approving the surgeries, but at least 60 tubal ligations were done at Valley State while Martin was in charge, according to the state contracts database.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:35 PM
a reply to: GodEmperor

Where's the part about being forced?

But did you notice this:

Federal and state laws ban inmate sterilizations if federal funds are used, reflecting concerns that prisoners might feel pressured to comply.

Anyway. Off topic.

edit on 1/16/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:50 PM

originally posted by: GodEmperor
No, individuals have a choice to plan ahead.

The conclusion will be reached by a government controlled health industry. Death panels will be implemented under this type of healthcare. People won't have the choice then.

Planning ahead doesn't work. Medical insurance as a concept is simply broken. You cannot run an insurance industry around illness when it's a virtual guarantee that everyone is going to get sick. Insurance only works when society agrees to pay more overall in order to protect against a rare catastrophic event. Catastrophic medical events aren't rare, they're common.

Lets say you're the average person, you make $50,000/year. You somehow manage to put away 20% of that into an HSA over the course of a 40 year career. That's $400,000, closer to $1,000,000 after interest. Cancer alone, which 55% of people get will cost $5 million to treat. How do you plan ahead for that? And that's not even taking into account minor illnesses along the way, or whatever your family needs.

You cannot plan ahead for this stuff.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:54 PM
a reply to: Aazadan

Obama said take the BLUE pill and hope for the best if you need really expensive treatment.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 07:55 PM

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Aazadan

What elements of single payer (which isn't single payer) does he keep describing? I've yet to hear anything about single payer or anything that even sounds like single payer. "Healthcare for all" is very vague, obama used it to describe obamacare.

Covering everyone without a mandate despite preexisting conditions. The only way to do that is single payer.

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 08:08 PM

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Aazadan

Obama said take the BLUE pill and hope for the best if you need really expensive treatment.

But But But

Obama's Health Care Solution for Elderly - Just take a Pill

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 08:15 PM
Trump vows ‘insurance for everybody’ in Obamacare replacement plan

On the bright side that means medicare,medicaid,tricare,planned parenthood would be superfluous.

On the other hand EVERYBODY already has access to it.

So the question IS.

Who pays for 'free' SNIP?

Someone will.

A new tax was created by the last guy to cover the medicare short fall. The medicare capital gains surtax.

Both Employers and Employee contributions to medicare doesn't cover that one.


DIDN'T think it was a good idea when the current guy wanted it.

edit on 16-1-2017 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 08:17 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

That would explain why Obama signed-off on allowing Health and Human Services to take $716 BILLION dollars out of the MEDICARE Trust Fund over 10 years, to cover obscenely high ObamaCare cost overruns.


Since the CNN/ABC/CBS/NBC don't report this, people are under the impression that Democrats won't touch Medicare. WRONG! they ALREADY HAVE.

posted on Jan, 17 2017 @ 01:26 AM

originally posted by: Phoenix
I'm sorry, that's just not true that hospitals are at mercy of insurance companies.

In reality hospitals charge whatever the market will bear. Also keep in mind medicare/medicare contracts prevent hospital from billing lower amounts to other third parties.

Keep in mind that when a big insurer says they'll pay "x" percent on given procedures, the hospitals turn around and bill 150%, get 100% and then claim a 1/3 loss on paper - the so-called non-profits are most egregious at this scam.

I personally have had relationship with someone at executive level in a so-called non-profit hospital system and know how it works from the inside.

You should be screaming for jail terms not more insurance which will only make things worse.

These corporations, people and groups have NO exemptions from law as they would have you believe.

The only exemption was for insurance providers.

Bottom line - most people would not need insurance for routine medical care if current law was enforced.

Only thing stopping that is hospital, doctors, med groups and big pharma paying off our politicians at local, state and federal levels.

Interesting perspective Phoenix, thanks for the insightful commentary. I don't think I've seen this point of view presented before, which in itself I find intriguing. Imagine that, a reasonable looking solution that doesn't involve massive government intrusion and overreach...

I think this is the blog you mentioned in another post:

A quote:

Not actually having a price or varying same based on method of payment without prior disclosure is a per-se and blatantly deceptive act. Try it when offering oil changes to the public for their cars and see how long you stay out of jail.

Further, these practices are illegal under the entire body of 15 USC Chapter 1. It is not possible for such an industry to maintain these practices without collusion and yet collision in fixing prices is per-se illegal under 15 United States Code.

It is further illegal to discriminate in pricing of commodities (that is, physical goods) sold, manufactured or used in interstate commerce between buyers of like kind and quantity. This means drugs, medical supplies and hardware of various sorts, all of which are manufactured and shipped in interstate (and international) commerce cannot lawfully be priced differently between consumers of like kind and quantity of same. That, once again, is long-standing law (Robinson-Patman) and part of 15 United States Code!

I shall have to look further into this.

posted on Jan, 17 2017 @ 01:34 AM

originally posted by: tribal

i myself can conceive of at least 2 or 3 practical ways america could have totally free health care. Trump will probably not use any of my ideas....but he could.

This also caught my attention. Do tell. What are these 'at least 2 or 3 practical ways america could have totally free health care'? I would be curious to hear what you propose, though I must admit I am skeptical already because it sounds too good to be true. Somebody would have to pay for it.

posted on Jan, 17 2017 @ 03:42 AM
a reply to: rickymouse

Socialized healthcare should be the way we go but it appears it will never happen. Too much money to be made off of sick people and too many brainwashed people who believe socialized medicine is inferior.

Here in the UK we have socialised healthcare, and have for a long time. There are problems with it, for sure - such as conditions which are borederline being rounded to the lowest common denominator. Meaning, for example, that I have a compliicated orthopaedic/ neurolgical condition (this is true, btw, not an hypothetical example), and that because my MRI scans show damage which is borderline treatable, in terms of statistically safe procedural measures, and that because there is a drive always to save money, the line across which I would be given expensive surgery to help in resolving the matter is shifted further away from what's best for me, and instead lies in favour of what's best for the pockets of the National Health Service. There is definitely a risk factor analysis being used in part of the decision-making process, but there absolutely is a cost-benefit analysis going on too. If my expensive surgery fails to treat the problem effectively, I will continue to need the same log-term care measures as I currently do. If, God forbid, my expensive surgery actually worsens my condition too, then everybody's royally screwed: myself, the healthcare service, the doctors & the government.

So yeah, socialised heathcare is not a simple or perfect solution by any means - and the best treatment will always be reserved for those who can pay for a private insurance plan. However, and trust me when I say this - without socialised medical care, and indeed without the other great standards of social care which exist in the UK, both I and my young family (wife & I were under 30 when it happened) would have been destroyed by destitution - which would not have been anything to do with our own efforts to live free & responsibly, working hard like everyone else. We worked, we dreamed - we were hit by God-awful circumstance in terms of an uncurable, ever-degenerating medical condition, and we fell from grace. Without socialised medicine & general social support, that would have been the end of us. Thankfully, it was not, and we've spent some years adapting, and are hopefully nearing a few opportunities which could help us to free ourselves once again to strive for the best that we can possibly achieve, for ourselves & our children. The support & care which are parts of the cornerstone of our nation's advancement have made this a possibility, even in really dire medical circumstances such as our own. Rule Brittania..!

But seriously, best wishes America, we really hope that the Don can make you great again, and that all the waspish oligarchs won't be able to stop him, and you, from achieving the dream for everyone. Not saying it has to be the same as what we have in the UK - that won't be the way of it, I'm sure. But I sincerely hope that Mr Don-Meister Elect can make great things happen for all citizens.

edit on JanuaryTuesday1701CST03America/Chicago-060044 by FlyInTheOintment because: spelling, clarification

posted on Jan, 17 2017 @ 03:49 AM
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Does the England/UK medical industry create a lot of individual wealth? In America we have tons of millionaires and even a few Billionaires, who cash-in on our insanely high cost of medical care.

posted on Jan, 17 2017 @ 08:18 AM
Pretty sure a good chunk of socialized healthcare could be covered by the money our governments send to Israel every year. And every other third world country looking for handouts.

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in