It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The Ongoing Saga of ACA-ObamaCare Repeal and Replace.

page: 6
6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: jtma508

Hey what source was this quote from?

Thanks




posted on May, 2 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


Given what GOP Rep Mark Sanford (South Carolina) said earlier today, and how ObamaCare was passed, even with divisions, DEMOCRATS have more INTEGRITY and DETERMINATION than REPUBLICANS.

Mark Sanford flat out admitted that Republicans LIED to all of us, when they said that they wanted to repeal ObamaCare. All the campaigning against ObamaCare, and voting against it after we elected them, was just playing the voters.. Deceiving us.

I wouldn't go that far yet. They still have 18 or so months to pass something. Take away 4 to 6 months of campaigning before the 2018 elections and they still have a good year to pass something. The ACA wasn't signed into law until March of 2010, meaning Republicans would have another 10 months or so just to pass something within the same time frame. I've convinced myself that it's inevitable that they'll pass something, either now or after some great "catastrophe" distracts the population long enough for them to slip a bill through.



If President Trump wants any kind of major successes as President, and the House is needed for those successes, he'd better focus on getting enough Democrats, in order to offset the Republicans that he's sure to lose. It's sad that it has to be this way, but Trump's not going to be able to make America greater again (in a significant way) without Democratic support in the House and Senate.

But that would require him actually working with Democrats on things the left wants. But his executive orders, administration picks, and constant threats against us have burned nearly all bridges. There have been some Democrats who are willing to work with him, but chances are they'll get primaried and/or kicked out asap. The "Blue Dog Democrats" (who largely voted against the ACA) lost more than half of their members because of the 2010 election.



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant


You sure know how to cheer a guy up! I hope you're wrong about Democrats not willing to work with President Trump. He is VERY flexible...wanting what's best for the American people.

Many Democrat positions are also positions that he advocates currently, and over the past 20 years. (Universal U.S. Healthcare / Infrastructure Improvement ). They wouldn't argue over Tax Reductions either, I don't think. It's best for all taxpayers.. Repubs and Dems.



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Quick Trip Down Memory Lane. Why aren't Republicans open to being "bribed" for their vote, like Ben Nelson was, for getting the ACA passed?
downtrend.com...


edit on 5/2/2017 by carewemust because: ?



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Quick Trip Down Memory Lane. Why aren't Republicans open to being "bribed" for their vote, like Ben Nelson was, for getting the ACA passed?
downtrend.com...



Looks like I spoke too soon! The GOP versions of the Democrat's BEN NELSON are meeting with President Trump tomorrow.
www.ketv.com...



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
The problem is that everyone who is getting something from the governmetn is all for cutting something else from the budget, but not what they get.

Since no one is willing to cut anything anywhere ... we keep racking up even more debt.

And, of course, no one is willing to take an across the board hair cut because then everyone would die and it would be mass chaos, dogs and cats living together, end of the world type stuff.

No one considers that everyone's collective personal greed will ensure that one day, instead of only having to make do with less, we'll all have to do completely without AND likely face an invasion from outside forced since our military will cease to exist too.


Math I've seen completely agrees with you.

At current average medical industry annual cost increases running 9% it is expected to overtake Federal budget in 4-5 years.

Tweaking without doing something about medical industry cost will extend that budget overtake 6-7 years.

All congress is doing is rearranging deck chairs whilst serving up more largesse to K-Street masters and medical industry clients - both sides of aisle btw.

Full force of long existing anti-trust laws could be applied today - but they wont.

They wont, not only because beholden to lobbyists, but also because it'd cause an economic recession as to big to fail medical industry is at 19%+ GDP, formerly for decades and decades it was 3% GDP.

Trump cant/won't do what's needed either even though it's within his offices power to do so today.

When the gimmidats figure out nothing left to plunder holy hell is going to break loose.

Yup you hit nail on head.



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix


A quote from President Trump today that's related to a portion of your post. He's personally congratulating the Air Force football team on winning a championship..

"Do you know what a donor is, fellows? You'll learn when you get a little older. You'll learn about donors. I used to be a donor. I used to get everything I wanted."

Source: www.cnn.com...



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Yup, he's right and what he's referring to will ultimately collapse the economy as Ketsuko alluded to in post I quoted.

Danmed if he does and causes deep recession and gets run out of office.

Danmed if he doesn't and economy tanks as federal budget get wholly consumed.

I know he thinks he can grow his way out of this but math says NO.



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 12:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix


Why is it that every time a new President takes office, all these alarm bells go off regarding spending and debt? I listened to Sean Hannity read off the latest status the "Debt Clock", and heard his warnings more times than I can count, when Obama was in office.

What is the actual number(s) where the average person feels pain from the government spending more than it's taking in, or printing?



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
May 3, 2017

"The Art of the Deal" on display.

""The amendment and a trip to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House this morning, was apparently enough to win over Upton and fellow hold out Rep. Billy Long.""

www.businessinsider.com...



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Phoenix


Why is it that every time a new President takes office, all these alarm bells go off regarding spending and debt? I listened to Sean Hannity read off the latest status the "Debt Clock", and heard his warnings more times than I can count, when Obama was in office.

What is the actual number(s) where the average person feels pain from the government spending more than it's taking in, or printing?


If one heats water slowly, frogs don't jump!

The pain is there right now everyday. Printing and deficit spending has played large role resulting in 196% cumulative rate of inflation since I started working in 1980 - wages sure did not rise anywhere near that much.

The 196% figure comes from government calculator which uses skewed government CPI figures and I believe that rate is much higher.

Exponentials work slowly at first and then suddenly ramp almost vertical, some recognized the problem more than ten years ago and tried bringing the issue into public domain, probably why you say what you said about hearing issue before.

Now we are about to enter the vertical on government spending, printing, deficit and taxing along with corrosponding rises in consumer costs.

Math doesn't lie and what I've seen shows government spending on medical consumes entire budget in 4-6 year time frame using current data if nothing is done on the provider cost side.

In other threads on subject I've said Insurance is wrong subject and bassackwards way to get affordable healthcare - Insurance is NOT healthcare.

What you need know is base cost of provider services determines insurance cost put as simply as it can be put.

These costs are not at all based on actual costs of providing services. They are made up on ouigi board of "value received" which is a polite way of saying "whatever we can get away with"

Greed flat and simple.

Greed that will soon destroy us economically.

The only way out is to return medical industry costs back to its traditional 3% of GDP using long existing laws we already have in place.

Some of you will be tempted to claim that'll be loss of service, no I beg to differ, that'll be a loss of clerical and administrative personell who don't actually provide service but you pay for them.

Something like 60 to 90% of people employed by medical do not provide care depending on organization.

This has to change through regulation, law and economics if you want affordable care and by default affordable insurance.

I don't see anyone with backbone to correct this problem including DT.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join