OBAMA/TRUMPCARE MEGATHREAD

[StrangeSox]

You might want to note that the take away was "far from [perfect]." Premiums were increasing a rapid rate before the ACA was passed. They're going to increase even more under the AHCA, especially if you're older or have pre-existing conditions. Many of the protections, such as removing lifetime caps and requiring that the insurance actually covers routine and important medical care, will be gone.

 

Yeah, the other option is to ditch the for-profit market-driven insurance idea because it doesn't work and do something along the lines of what we already do for everyone over 65 and what every other developed and even most semi-developed countries in the world do: provide health care access for their entire population with better outcomes and at a cheaper cost than what we do here.

 

edit: I guess the other other option is to take the stance that you don't think health care access is a right or something that the government should guarantee or help its citizens obtain, and you don't care if that leaves millions without access to affordable health care.

Edited May 4, 2017 by StrangeSox

[RockRaines]

You're doing a lot of stating the obvious. If you have cancer and you don't treat it, it's probably going to affect you. Regardless, you seem to be an advocate of using the service of health insurance. I am too, we can agree on that. It's pretty important to get and you have the option to get it whether the government mandates it to you or you go and get it yourself. It's a low bar for the current administration to beat here so I am hopeful that they can get a better plan in the second try that is not a government mandate with rapidly increasing premiums.

Premiums were always rising, and insurance companies are making record profits. Something has to change and its more than just the ACA, which probably could have been implemented much better if the GOP wasnt so dedicated to blocking it. Now we have something that is imperfect and is being replaced by absolute crap, lowering the bar even further.

[Dick Allen]

Premiums were always rising, and insurance companies are making record profits. Something has to change and its more than just the ACA, which probably could have been implemented much better if the GOP wasnt so dedicated to blocking it. Now we have something that is imperfect and is being replaced by absolute crap, lowering the bar even further.

The drug and insurance companies really are going to like this. They will make even more money.

 

 

What really pissed off republicans is the rich basically funded Obamacare. Now their tax breaks will all good to go, and they will be able to put more money in storage making America great again. Hey, Ivanka's childcare thing is for everyone. Even those making under $30k a year will save themselves $10.

[StrangeSox]

The drug and insurance companies really are going to like this. They will make even more money.

 

 

What really pissed off republicans is the rich basically funded Obamacare. Now their tax breaks will all good to go, and they will be able to put more money in storage making America great again. Hey, Ivanka's childcare thing is for everyone. Even those making under $30k a year will save themselves $10.

 

Nah, pretty much every major insurer, doctor group, hospital group, and disease research/advocacy group came out strongly against this.

[RockRaines]

Why don't you offer group insurance plans for groups of people? Why are Walmart's premiums so much less than a smaller company's? Because their massive workforce makes them so lucrative and the insurance giants work their ass off to get that account. If people joined Individual Health Pools they can work insurance companies to the same effect. Could you imagine the type of leverage an AARP based health pool could exert on insurance companies?

 

You force the the insurance companies to work for the people. You don't force the people to pay the government so they can then significantly increase prices once their plan's namesake leaves office.

AARP was vehemently against this bill....

 

Wal-mart's premiums are lower because Out of pocket expenses are higher than the ACA.

[StrangeSox]

Why don't you offer group insurance plans for groups of people? Why are Walmart's premiums so much less than a smaller company's? Because their massive workforce makes them so lucrative and the insurance giants work their ass off to get that account. If people joined Individual Health Pools they can work insurance companies to the same effect. Could you imagine the type of leverage an AARP based health pool could exert on insurance companies?

 

You force the the insurance companies to work for the people. You don't force the people to pay the government so they can then significantly increase prices once their plan's namesake leaves office.

 

The ACA subsidized the purchase of private insurance on exchanges. It didn't send money to the government to buy government plans. There was a public option in the House bill, but it was killed in the Senate. There was a fee that went to the government to fund the subsidies if you didn't carry insurance so that you didn't kick off a death spiral in the insurance industry by requiring them to cover pre-existing conditions but not requiring anyone to sign up.

 

The ACA had numerous regulations in it that forced insurance companies to work for the people, such as requiring community ratings, insuring basic coverages, insuring that the companies spent at least 80% of their revenues on health care, and eliminated lifetime caps. The AHCA guts those protections and lets insurance companies go back to focusing exclusively on profits above all else.

 

And that's why private insurance is less effective and more expensive than the single-payer programs that many, many countries run. The insurance company's main focus is generating returns for shareholders, not providing for health care. But if you're going to insist on a market-based solution, that's what the ACA was.

[StrangeSox]

During Obama's administration?

 

This always cracks me up. The insurance companies and Wall Street were raking it in all throughout Obama's administration. Even when they f***ed up after Bush's affirmative action housing plan and Wall Streets financial experiments Obama bailed them out. The 1% got way richer and the middle class shrunk. Now everyone's all up in arms because in theory, Trump is going to make the rich richer. He would be offering a continuation of an administration you have been singing the praises of for almost a decade now.

 

A whole lot of people on the left haven't been happy with many aspects of Obama's administration*. Republicans will make those things worse. That's pretty straight forward.

 

*that was the whole core of Bernie's support in the primaries and the ongoing divide between the left-liberal base and outside leftists and the neoliberal/establishment base of the party

Edited May 4, 2017 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

[caulfield12]

I'm not so sure we should be praising Wal-Mart insurance...assuming they can actually earn enough hours to be eligible. It's pretty common to be suppressed at 28-33 hours, leaving them out in the cold to control rising costs and competition from Amazon.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/20...e/#64455e753e83

[RockRaines]

Did they re-use the banner from Bush's war?

[StrangeSox]

What I suggested isn't in the bill.

 

What if we pooled every American together? Imagine the cost-savings then!

[RockRaines]

A whole lot of people on the left haven't been happy with many aspects of Obama's administration. Republicans will make those things worse. That's pretty straight forward.

Thats right. Its not a continuation, it makes it even more unbalanced than it has been. Going backwards is not the direction we should be happy about.

[StrangeSox]

Did they re-use the banner from Bush's war?

It's a photoshop but yeah that's the joke.

 

Double joke because they haven't actually accomplished anything yet since this still has to pass the Senate.

 

Oh and the Senate said they're writing their own bill from scratch.

[BigSqwert]

Stolen from Twitter:

 

A sexual assault offender can become President, but a sexual assault victim cannot get healthcare.

[caulfield12]

A whole lot of people on the left haven't been happy with many aspects of Obama's administration. Republicans will make those things worse. That's pretty straight forward.

 

So apparently letting all the Big Banks and auto makers go bankrupt would have been preferable, lol.

Mitt Romney stuff there.

 

And Bush/Paulson enacted the framework for the bailouts (like Washington Mutual getting picked up for a pittance by his buddies) before he left office. Obama should have undone all of that, TARP too, thrown America into complete and utter chaos and 20-25% unemployment.

 

Revisionism.

Edited May 4, 2017 by caulfield12

[gatnom]

It's pretty crazy to me that people's hatred of Obama causes them to blame our failed healthcare system entirely on him. Obamacare didn't do enough to fix the system (congress saw to that), but the system was broken long before he tried to help the disadvantaged get healthcare.

 

Gotta make sure we remember who the bad guys are, though.

 

 

 

 

 

[chw42]

Stolen from Twitter:

 

A sexual assault offender can become President, but a sexual assault victim cannot get healthcare.

 

How in the world is rape a pre-existing condition? How that ended up in the bill is beyond me. But then again, this is the GOP we're talking about here.

[StrangeSox]

This would be funny if it wasn't already a failure.

 

Medicare + most other countries in the world say otherwise though.

[Soxbadger]

When Obamacare went into the effect the company I worked for just stopped scheduling people 30 hours a week. There's a lot of valuable experience in seeing the actual system you read about in your everyday life.

 

 

This would be funny if it wasn't already a failure.

 

The valuable experience would have been making some law that allowed people to get insurance from a larger pool through a website.

 

Or

 

They could have made a law that said that if employers are going to provide healthcare to anyone in their company, they have to offer it to everyone regardless of hours worked.

 

I dont think I need to explain the irony of the first statement or why the second statement never would pass.

[GoSox05]

Medicare + most other countries in the world say otherwise though.

 

Imagine thinking Medicare was a failure.

 

 

 

[RockRaines]

Medicare + most other countries in the world say otherwise though.

Literally every other civilized country has proven its a successful model.

 

The USA has only proven that privatized for profit healthcare is a failure.

[Soxbadger]

Literally every other civilized country has proven its a successful model.

 

The USA has only proven that privatized for profit healthcare is a failure.

 

But I only want to go to doctors who went to Northwestern or better. If the govt is in control of my healthcare maybe I wont have that choice!

[RockRaines]

But I only want to go to doctors who went to Northwestern or better. If the govt is in control of my healthcare maybe I wont have that choice!

My dentist DID go to U of I. Maybe thats why my gums hurt so bad.

[caulfield12]

Just be happy they didn't go to tOSU, lol.

[Soxbadger]

My dentist DID go to U of I. Maybe thats why my gums hurt so bad.

 

If you need a new dentist mine went to Northwestern...

 

(edit)

 

I dont believe he is "in network" for any insurance though. Last time I was there I was joking around because my office switched from Metlife to Delta Dental, and I kept saying that it sounded like a second rate insurance company. He claimed that Delta Dental is fine, but I still have my suspicions. I guess at the end of the day its more his problem then mine, because hes gotta get those insurance codes right.

Edited May 4, 2017 by Soxbadger