President Trump is Hastening ObamaCare Demise - Wants a Better HealthCare System ASAP.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: carewemust

Just to be clear, you're openly acknowledging that Trump's deliberately making it harder for people to get healthcare through the ACA, right? And you suspect that he's trying to make it worse in order to force Congress to repeal it and replace it with something new, right?

So what happens to the Americans who need healthcare but can't get it through the crippled ACA if Congress still doesn't pass an alternative to the ACA? It sounds like this ploy is risking people's lives for political gain.

Well then certainly you can appreciate how the millions of americans now paying 3x what they were paying for health care before ACA were and are exploited for political gain as well as economic. They were promised relief and so, like dolts, voted republican who are now blaming turncoat 2 or 3 republicans for screwing up the wet dream.

a reply to: Logarock

I've been handing employee health insurance since 2005. The costs go up EVERY YEAR regardless of ACA.

If you're upset about rising costs, get them to fix ACA and remove the REPUBLICAN-based gimmies to the the insurance companies.

a reply to: xuenchen

It was still a carbon copy of Romney care..

It was still authored by republicans..

If a bunch of republicans vote for some law that protects abortion. That doesn't make "pro choice" the right wing position..

What logical fallacy is that when you pretend one thing means another??

I forget. They are all in Latin.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: xuenchen

It was still a carbon copy of Romney care..

It was still authored by republicans..

If a bunch of republicans vote for some law that protects abortion. That doesn't make "pro choice" the right wing position..

What logical fallacy is that when you pretend one thing means another??

I forget. They are all in Latin.

Well I know you can show us all the ACA sections that were "authored" by Republicans right ?

Details are important.

Not that it matters now that people will pay stiff money and like it.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yet no Republicans voted "yes" on ACA.

And here you can see insurance donates big to Democrats too.

The "lopsidedness" between Ds and Rs is the fact the Rs have more people in Congress, there is no other reason.

opensecrets

Gang of Six, Xuench. Heritage Foundation, RomneyCare.

It's only sad and pathetic when you try to side-step the truth so obviously.

BwaaaHaHaHa

Show us the line-by-line comparisons.

I won't hold my breath.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I think it's fair to say the ACA made the price increase, increase (lol).

We are forcing insurance companies to cover more costly people and god knows they are not going to lessen their profit margins..

IMHO

It should have been public single payer from the jump.. especially once the GOP pulled out.

I'm sure they expected it to fail and the only alternative would be to strip the subsidies without lowering prices, or go full single payer.

They just weren't betting on a GOP majority in every branch.

BUT THAT DOESNT MAKE THIS THE LEFT WING POLICY POSITION.

The individual democrats agreed to the most left , rightwing policy. So they deserve more than half the blame.

I think it is gonna get BAD before we fix it..

Insurance companies have to know their days are numbered, so will gouge whatever they can on their way out.

It's gonna take a lot of dead kids and grand mothers before the GOP finally breaks down and admits healthcare CANNOT be profitable and fulfill its function.

a reply to: xuenchen

As a matter of fact ...

Chairman Max Baucus, in the spring of 2009, signaled his desire to find a bipartisan compromise, working especially closely with Grassley, his dear friend and Republican counterpart, who had been deeply involved in crafting the Republican alternative to Clintoncare. Baucus and Grassley convened an informal group of three Democrats and three Republicans on the committee, which became known as the “Gang of Six.” They covered the parties’ ideological bases; the other GOPers were conservative Mike Enzi of Wyoming and moderate Olympia Snowe of Maine, and the Democrats were liberal Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and moderate Kent Conrad of North Dakota.

Baucus very deliberately started the talks with a template that was the core of the 1993-4 Republican plan, built around an individual mandate and exchanges with private insurers—much to the chagrin of many Democrats and liberals who wanted, if not a single-payer system, at least one with a public insurance option. Through the summer, the Gang of Six engaged in detailed discussions and negotiations to turn a template into a plan.

The Atlantic

a reply to: Gryphon66


Well the whole thing is a gimmie it looks like. The republican back in the day could afford not to vote for it....it was going to pass anyway and they could use the no vote politically. Only need to look at whats going on now to see that.

And costs going up. Yea sure they creep up every year but most surged to 3x former cost after ACA. Many went up by 6 thosand + in to years.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So quote the exact language section in the ACA that came about.

And it still doesn't matter.

You will keep paying and paying and paying.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Gryphon66

So quote the exact language section in the ACA that came about.

And it still doesn't matter.

You will keep paying and paying and paying.

The core of the ACA was from the Republican plan, Xuench. You know this, I know this.

If you want details, look them up. I've already given you the spoon and the bowl.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Gryphon66


Well the whole thing is a gimmie it looks like. The republican back in the day could afford not to vote for it....it was going to pass anyway and they could use the no vote politically. Only need to look at whats going on now to see that.

And costs going up. Yea sure they creep up every year but most surged to 3x former cost after ACA. Many went up by 6 thosand + in to years.

From 2005 to 2008 I saw costs double every year. You don't have to believe me, but I'm telling you, from experience, the soaring rates are not merely due to the ACA.

Until we take the government back from the corporate lobbies, we're going to keep seeing this kind of garbage.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh no ...

He meant a ridiculous 40 page report on the intricate similarities, differences and changes..



I guess a really fair analysis would be that the ACA is neither right or left..

It's a kinda crappy mix of the two.

It is too afraid to go full on public and has still only increased prices..

Mainly because it forces insurance companies to do the job they have been claiming they are doing..

That system just cannot be profitable.

If we wanna spend 4 million dollars per person for end of life care, and your life time premiums are only a couple hundred K.

The only way to make money is in refusing services you legit owe, and people who get sick once they lose coverage.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Understood.

The things they claim to hate the worst about the ACA though, aside from the fact that it was working before President Trump decided to illegally sabotage it, were the core of every Republican plan from 1986 onward, particularly the plans put forth in 1993 by Chaffee, Grassley, etc.

In November, 1993, Sen. John Chafee, R-R.I., introduced what was considered to be one of the main Republican health overhaul proposals: “A bill to provide comprehensive reform of the health care system of the United States.”

Titled the “Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993,” it had 21 co-sponsors, including two Democrats (Sens. Boren and Kerrey). The bill, which was not debated or voted upon, was an alternative to President Bill Clinton’s plan. It bears similarity to the Democratic bill passed by the Senate Dec. 24, 2009, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Summary Of A 1993 Republican Health Reform Plan - Kaiser

Subtitle F: Universal Coverage – Requires each citizen or lawful permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan or equivalent health care program by January 1, 2005. Provides an exception for any individual who is opposed for religious reasons to health plan coverage, including those who rely on healing using spiritual means through prayer alone.

a reply to: carewemust

Your ideas for healthcare sound reasonable. The tax must go though.

Alot of people couldn't qualify for Obamacare, like me, and now insurance is sky high.

Additionally, doctors are leaving Obamacare and we have fewer doctors in medical school because of the uncertainties of a future in medicine. Granted, the ones there because of hoping to make big money can go away. Subsidizing med school costs makes sense.

And what about our veterans? Don't mean to drift the issue but, wow, help?

a reply to: carewemustLets put the Sheepie on the same healthcare provider as the Government is
on