Archive

GOP Healthcare plan

  • like_that
    QuakerOats;1864851 wrote:Which might be why the continuing bailouts are illegal ................but that never stopped the obama admin before
    If that is the case, then why the fuck is Trump still allowing this illegal activity?
  • superman
    like_that;1864870 wrote:

    Nice to see you act righteous and fair now. : thumbup:
    Sleeper is the worst.
  • gut
    like_that;1864870 wrote:Wasn't it extended?
    I don't know.

    Sounds like we might be talking two different things. I was referring to the original stop-loss or guarantees to insurance companies the first two years because they were unsure of what the risk pools would look like.

    This appears to deal with cost-sharing subsidies (not sure what that means) given to insurance companies to reduce prices for people below certain income levels. This is, in essence, the wealth transfer used to subsidize people who couldn't afford the insurance. But there may be some questions as to whether Congress actually appropriated the funds, or in other words the money came from somewhere other than Obamacare taxes.

    The former is a bailout, if you like. I think the latter is something different.
  • Dr Winston O'Boogie
    like_that;1864870 wrote:Nice to see you act righteous and fair now. : thumbup:
    What do you mean?
  • like_that
    Dr Winston O'Boogie;1864889 wrote:What do you mean?
    The point is I didn't see you or many others being as vigilant as you are now. Most of this admin's criticism is well deserved, I just have a hard time taking it seriously from the same people who turned a blind eye to the same shit for the past 8 years. The same people who all of a sudden get to pull the "you can't bring up obama because you complained about us brining up bush" only after 8 months.
  • like_that
    Another example of what single payer would be like in the states, provided by the "greatest" healthcare in the world. Keep in mind this is a system for roughly 65M people vs system in the states that would try to cover the costs of roughly 320M people.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/02/obese-patients-and-smokers-banned-from-all-routine-operations-by/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_fb
  • gut
    like_that;1864896 wrote:.... Keep in mind this is a system for roughly 65M people vs system in the states that would try to cover the costs of roughly 320M people....

    The more you really think about it, the more the Founding Fathers look like unbelievable genius. The above issue isn't just healthcare, but a problem in general when people in OH don't want to live like people in SF. But that's where state rights and independence come in! Truly a great idea, until a bunch of greedy lawyers decided to become politicians and tell everyone how to live.

    And, as always, the old line about "the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" rings true. The trick, increasingly, these days is they just print the money. But while healthcare can reasonably be a basic and necessary service, if you actually look at other welfare and entitlements you realize it's probably overly generous (based on poverty levels, as defined by politicians - poverty in the US is NOTHING remotely close to being poor anywhere else in the world).
  • ppaw1999
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sanders-bill-expands-medicare-for-all-lacks-details-on-cost/ar-AArQW9f?li=BBnb7Kz

    A health care plan with no means to pay for it? How helpful is that? These politicians should not be allowed to propose a plan unless it is fully formulated from start to finish. What a waste of time.
  • iclfan2
    The 2020 candidates (Harris, Booker, Warren, granted all suck) are dumb as hell for putting their support on this. It's like the democrats are trying to go as left as possible going into 2020. It makes no sense.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • CenterBHSFan
    ppaw1999;1871559 wrote:http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sanders-bill-expands-medicare-for-all-lacks-details-on-cost/ar-AArQW9f?li=BBnb7Kz

    A health care plan with no means to pay for it? How helpful is that? These politicians should not be allowed to propose a plan unless it is fully formulated from start to finish. What a waste of time.
    "We welcome the Democrats' strategy of moving even further left," said Katie Martin, spokeswoman for the Senate GOP's campaign organization.
    This is pretty much all you need to know.
  • gut
    ppaw1999;1871559 wrote: A health care plan with no means to pay for it? How helpful is that? These politicians should not be allowed to propose a plan unless it is fully formulated from start to finish. What a waste of time.
    Well, you don't rack-up $20T in debt by actually paying for stuff you do. Just looks like Dems are finally dropping the pretense that they can pay for their socialist policies.

    Also add it to the list of things politicians say to get elected - a mix of lies and bullshit, bad ideas, and half-baked plans that they don't want to detail or have scrutinized.
  • BoatShoes
    gut;1865006 wrote:The more you really think about it, the more the Founding Fathers look like unbelievable genius. The above issue isn't just healthcare, but a problem in general when people in OH don't want to live like people in SF. But that's where state rights and independence come in! Truly a great idea, until a bunch of greedy lawyers decided to become politicians and tell everyone how to live.
    /QUOTE]

    A large number of founding fathers were lawyers including Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, John Quincy Adams and Patrick Henry - to name a few. James Madison never practiced law but he studied law specifically for the purpose of getting into politics and public policy. In other words, the Federalist Papers which begat the Constitution with States' Rights and the Declaration of Independence were written by lawyers :laugh:
  • BoatShoes
    gut;1871575 wrote:Well, you don't rack-up $20T in debt by actually paying for stuff you do. Just looks like Dems are finally dropping the pretense that they can pay for their socialist policies.

    Also add it to the list of things politicians say to get elected - a mix of lies and bullshit, bad ideas, and half-baked plans that they don't want to detail or have scrutinized.
    Meanwhile the Republicans will do absolutely nothing about the debt and debt ceiling while controlling all three branches of government. (P.S. because the wall street establishment knows the GOP hysteria over the debt ceiling for the last 8 years was all bullshit).

    Over half a decade of debt hysteria on this board. At what point are people who frantically predict doom over the outstanding number of U.S. Treasuries any different than the people who hand me pamphlets and tell me that the world is going to end?
  • BoatShoes
    ppaw1999;1871559 wrote:http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sanders-bill-expands-medicare-for-all-lacks-details-on-cost/ar-AArQW9f?li=BBnb7Kz

    A health care plan with no means to pay for it? How helpful is that? These politicians should not be allowed to propose a plan unless it is fully formulated from start to finish. What a waste of time.
    I don't agree with Single-Payer but all federal government spending is paid for by Congress appropriating dollars into existence and then draining previously issued dollars from the private economy either through some kind of tax or through the sale of a treasury security. If a given public policy isn't projected to strain the supply-side of the economy then a new tax isn't necessary. Accordingly, they should have included some kind of tax that might be appropriate in the event that the Single-Payer plan they proposed does not reduce prices to levels seen elsewhere in the world as they hope it does or something along those lines.
  • like_that
    BoatShoes;1871790 wrote:Meanwhile the Republicans will do absolutely nothing about the debt and debt ceiling while controlling all three branches of government. (P.S. because the wall street establishment knows the GOP hysteria over the debt ceiling for the last 8 years was all bullshit).

    Over half a decade of debt hysteria on this board. At what point are people who frantically predict doom over the outstanding number of U.S. Treasuries any different than the people who hand me pamphlets and tell me that the world is going to end?
    I was with you until the last paragraph. They dgaf, because the majority of them won't be around to truly be affected.
  • gut
    BoatShoes;1871790 wrote:...P.S. because the wall street establishment knows the GOP hysteria over the debt ceiling for the last 8 years was all bullshit.

    You really, really really need to start reading economists and investors who aren't talking out of their ass to push a political agenda. The above post is a very concise summary of a whole lot of things you continue to misunderstand.
  • QuakerOats
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/17/obamacare-replacement-with-state-block-grants-rall/


    Looks like it could happen.
  • gut

    LOL, if that happens the libtard meltdown will be epic.....I'm not sure the Congressional Dems can handle taking themselves out of national healthcare and just sending a check to the states, who would be accountable to people in their states (imagine that - local issues being goverened by locally elected representatives!!!!)

    Then you can't blame Repubs for taking your healthcare, and they're not who you blame if healthcare sucks in your state. It's brilliant, politically.
  • fish82
    It’s alive. :laugh:
  • Commander of Awesome
    gut;1872321 wrote:LOL, if that happens the libtard meltdown will be epic.....I'm not sure the Congressional Dems can handle taking themselves out of national healthcare and just sending a check to the states, who would be accountable to people in their states (imagine that - local issues being goverened by locally elected representatives!!!!)

    Then you can't blame Repubs for taking your healthcare, and they're not who you blame if healthcare sucks in your state. It's brilliant, politically.
    That is not an accurate portrayal of what this plan entails.
  • QuakerOats
    Commander of Awesome;1872415 wrote:That is not an accurate portrayal of what this plan entails.[/QUO

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-19/what-s-in-last-republican-shot-to-kill-obamacare-quicktake-q-a



    Do it
  • gut
    Commander of Awesome;1872415 wrote:That is not an accurate portrayal of what this plan entails.
    How so?

    Obamacare is a broken, failed system that was basically the dumbest, most incompetent, most expensive way a moron would expand medicaid. So just cut all the bullshit, give the money to the states and let them manage it....a really fucking simple and effective solution.
  • Commander of Awesome
    gut;1872478 wrote:How so?

    Obamacare is a broken, failed system that was basically the dumbest, most incompetent, most expensive way a moron would expand medicaid. So just cut all the bullshit, give the money to the states and let them manage it....a really fucking simple and effective solution.
    Here is the quote from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office):

    Like the House legislation, the Senate Republican bill introduced in June will produce major losses in insurance coverage that will mostly affect low- and moderate-income Americans, according to the CBO’s analysis of the bills. The centerpiece of the Senate bill is a series of major reductions in federal aid for poor Americans who rely on Medicaid and for consumers who currently qualify for federal subsidies to help them buy private health insurance through the Obamacare marketplace. The CBO estimated that under the House bill, 23 million fewer people would have insurance over the next decade. The estimate is 22 million for the previous Senate version.
    Percentage of uninsured could nearly double under GOP plans by 2026


    How is that a good thing? Fuck the poor, and.....

    Gut, I would like to ask you, what your major gripe with affordable health care is.
  • gut
    Commander of Awesome;1872531 wrote:what your major gripe with affordable health care is.

    LMFAO....are you for real? The CBO also estimated Obamacare would insure like 3X as many people has it has, so.....

    Federal money is going to states for their healthcare. Why are you so hellbent on people in CA having a say, via federal fiat, on how healthcare is run in Kentucky? Do you think that, maybe just possibly, people in KY should be able to vote for THEIR healthcare in their state?

    Why are you defending Obamacare? Isn't this really a debate on Medicaid? The funding is a budget decision that has nothing to do with the merits or lack thereof of the Repub healthcare plan.
  • Commander of Awesome
    gut;1872534 wrote:LMFAO....are you for real? The CBO also estimated Obamacare would insure like 3X as many people has it has, so.....

    Federal money is going to states for their healthcare. Why are you so hellbent on people in CA having a say, via federal fiat, on how healthcare is run in Kentucky? Do you think that, maybe just possibly, people in KY should be able to vote for THEIR healthcare in their state?

    Why are you defending Obamacare? Isn't this really a debate on Medicaid? The funding is a budget decision that has nothing to do with the merits or lack thereof of the Repub healthcare plan.
    Again, you fail to grasp what this law does nor state your issues with the current plan other than obama.

    “Federal funding for these populations would no longer vary based on need, so if the state were to offer coverage and financial assistance to everyone who needed it, it would be on the hook for any unexpected changes in demand, for example because of a recession, and any unexpected changes in cost, for example because of a new drug,” CBPP’s Aron-Dine said.

    In a state like Ohio for instance, this would be devastating (see 2008 recession).

    “The bill says they can do whatever they want, but obviously that cuts a huge hole in their budget,” said Tim Jost, an emeritus professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law. “The problem is primarily one of just coming up with the money to do it, having a commitment to do it.”

    You wanna raise taxes gut?