Just because we voted for Trump doesn't mean we support anything the republican party does. Their one purpose and one purpose only was to keep taxes low and like everything else they attempt largely failed. Mitt Romney is about worthless for anything except maybe Secretary of State if he can fit the server in his bathroom. We are not party loyalists and don't even like the party. Sort of like Trump. There is an ACA republican replacement plan that passed congress and is still sitting there. But it will now have to be revised because the palms have changed and nobody yet knows where the grease is going to come from.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
How would infrastructure spending benefit the working class?
- Thread starter drcha
- Start date
Just because we voted for Trump doesn't mean we support anything the republican party does. Their one purpose and one purpose only was to keep taxes low and like everything else they attempt largely failed. Mitt Romney is about worthless for anything except maybe Secretary of State if he can fit the server in his bathroom. We are not party loyalists and don't even like the party. Sort of like Trump. There is an ACA republican replacement plan that passed congress and is still sitting there. But it will now have to be revised because the palms have changed and nobody yet knows where the grease is going to come from.
A lot of republicans fought Obamacare even though it was modeled after their presidential candidates from 2012. In mass, I think it's largely been a success.
What is the republican replacement? What I read today (which was admittedly an oped) said that no republican alternative existed which is why trump was going to preserve a lot of Obamacare.
If you can wait until you get sick to buy ACA policy, it isn't really insurance is it?
I don't know, is it? The fact that the individual mandate socializes the costs and risks doesn't make it not insurance.
Simple google search would do it:A lot of republicans fought Obamacare even though it was modeled after their presidential candidates from 2012. In mass, I think it's largely been a success.
What is the republican replacement? What I read today (which was admittedly an oped) said that no republican alternative existed which is why trump was going to preserve a lot of Obamacare.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform
Republicans don't like anything that begins with the letter O. They are hopeless. As far as ACA goes, now we are hooked on something even though nothing was better.A lot of republicans fought Obamacare even though it was modeled after their presidential candidates from 2012. In mass, I think it's largely been a success.
What is the republican replacement? What I read today (which was admittedly an oped) said that no republican alternative existed which is why trump was going to preserve a lot of Obamacare.
Republicans lame idea is to lower insurance costs by eliminating some stupid pro insurance aspects of ACA, but everybody knows the problem is cost of care not cost of insurance. One good thing is going back to allowing single men to buy a simple low premium catastrophic policy which was outlawed by the O man. As it is now we are forced to include maternity care and pap smears and birth control pills on our policy and no bare bones catastrophic policy allowed. I'm no expert on the ACA and I'm only telling you how I see it. If it was up to me I would have the government pick up the total cost of your medical care in excess of 20% of your annual income and get totally out of the medical business since it is just one more business they obviously don't understand. But they never ask me anything, they didn't even know I was out there until Nov 8, and they still never ask, but that doesn't stop them from telling me what the American people are terrified of every night on tv.
Insurance against what? It's not insurance in case I get sick in the future. I can buy that if I ever get sick. We will cover you but you should buy a policy just in case. In case of what?I don't know, is it? The fact that the individual mandate socializes the costs and risks doesn't make it not insurance.
Man, I gotta go smoke, I'm way behind on my medicine. I feel like a freak on display and Canadians and Brits are doing an autopsy because I must be one of those undocumented Americans (what Trump supporters call aliens) who just arrived in his space buggy from the Heartland they heard about on BBC. At anyrate, I think online education would be a productive infrastructure project and I don't mind paying for it and I don't care who pays for it and google is going to do it and then we can just have the government buy it from them. I just hope they understand that Columbus discovered America. I want kids today to have the same great education I had.
Last edited:
Right, so there is a bit of nuance here that you have omitted originally... You said "nothing is done", but what you meant to say was that "nothing right is done", where "right" is defined as "helping the majority".
I have to say that, again, I do have some sympathy and I hope you believe me when I say that I do understand these things (gimme a little credit).
However, the story doesn't quite add up for me.
Firstly, the majority of voters in the US, technically, voted for Hillary, so I am not really sure I buy the idea that "helping the majority" criterion is the right one.
Secondly, on Obamacare, I am no expert, but if it didn't help anybody, why are there at least some statistics that suggest that it did? Why did enrolment jump so much since the election?
On Dodd-Frank, I appreciate that you care about the lives of all those peeps employed by hedge funds and banks who lost their jobs. In my experience, Dodd-Frank was a great inconvenience for the banks, while actually helping the guy on the street. For instance, consider that CFPB, which exposed the recent Wells Fargo shenanigans and fined the bank, was created by Dodd-Frank. Now you may call me a cynic, but I am pretty sure I know who's gonna benefit the most from the repeal of Dodd-Frank. Have you seen GS stock recently?
On regime change, I agree.
I think newwurldmn expressed my sense of cognitive dissonance arnd Trump quite well. I just don't really get the logic.
Marty, ACA reduced the number of Americans who were uninsured. It did NOT increase the number of Americans getting healthcare. Don't confuse insurance with care. Easy to do since in the UK the gov't provides actual healthcare to it's people, not insurance.
ACA (like all major legislation) has problems but it's the step in the right direction. It is based on a republican plan created by mitt Romney for Massachusetts.
I think volcker was a diversion tactic which is why the banks didnt put up a fight on it.
Richard Nixon proposed medicare for all in 1972. The Democrats fought it tooth and nail and were successful at defeating it. That was a step in the right direction. Not handing over the biggest financial windfall profit to the insurance industry in history while sending healthcare costs higher by 200% to 300%. There are no ways to contain costs in ACA with the way it's currently set up. The reason for this is because we have two systems. A private healthcare system and the insurance exchanges. When one applies for ACA it's assumed you have every medical problem in the world since by law, they cannot ask you any qualifying medical questions. With private care they can and do. And since private care is cheaper, if one is going to the exchange market it has to be assumed that their health did not qualify meaning they are in a high risk pool. There is no way to make a market in this product without asking for premium rates.
I just recently priced a policy for myself and compared the product offered to me on the insurance exchange vs the private policy I have with Cigna. Whoa Nelly. The gov't product was twice the cost and two times the deductible. Good Lord highway robbery. I'm fortunate though that I'm healthy. The ACA policy could not take my health into account when pricing my policy and therein lies the rub. This is a effing train wreck and no Trump has no solution for this. The policy never should have been passed to begin with.
Richard Nixon proposed medicare for all in 1972. The Democrats fought it tooth and nail and were successful at defeating it. That was a step in the right direction. Not handing over the biggest financial windfall profit to the insurance industry in history while sending healthcare costs higher by 200% to 300%. There are no ways to contain costs in ACA with the way it's currently set up. The reason for this is because we have two systems. A private healthcare system and the insurance exchanges. When one applies for ACA it's assumed you have every medical problem in the world since by law, they cannot ask you any qualifying medical questions. With private care they can and do. And since private care is cheaper, if one is going to the exchange market it has to be assumed that their health did not qualify meaning they are in a high risk pool. There is no way to make a market in this product without asking for premium rates.
I just recently priced a policy for myself and compared the product offered to me on the insurance exchange vs the private policy I have with Cigna. Whoa Nelly. The gov't product was twice the cost and two times the deductible. Good Lord highway robbery. I'm fortunate though that I'm healthy. The ACA policy could not take my health into account when pricing my policy and therein lies the rub. This is a effing train wreck and no Trump has no solution for this. The policy never should have been passed to begin with.
Correct for you. For my friend who had thyroid cancer at the age of 30, she can now get a flu shot and other preventative care at a price she can afford as a result of the exchanges.
Does Obamacare care need some changes? Absolutely. But it starts us in the right direction for ensuring healthcare for all which is good for the nation.
All that for a flu shot?Correct for you. For my friend who had thyroid cancer at the age of 30, she can now get a flu shot and other preventative care at a price she can afford as a result of the exchanges.
Does Obamacare care need some changes? Absolutely. But it starts us in the right direction for ensuring healthcare for all which is good for the nation.
You can get them at the grocery store for $30. What do you think people did before the "exchanges"? If she can't afford it she can apply for medicaid and they will pay. If she can't qualify for medicaid then she can pay.