Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

[PleaseBlitz]

5 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said:

 

I don't know. When I look at the twitter feeds for Dem leadership. They are mostly on Trump. Actually, scanning their feeds now. I don't see anything you're talking about recently. 

 

Well certainly this week the messaging MUST BE focused on stopping the repeal bill and nothing else.  Also, Twitter is not the ideal medium to have a policy discussion, character limits and all.  I get the email blasts from my senators and congressman (in VA), they always have stuff in there.  

[Weganator]

26 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Create public option that is standardized as to forms, non-profit status. That will create competition, which the insurance companies don't want either.

It creates a false competition. It's not like the government can go out of business, taxes will always be collected under threat of imprisonment. These taxes are being collected from the business / individuals you intend to cannibalize in the name of fairness.

[TradeTheBeal!]

3 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

 

Ohhh, ACCESS! Yeah, they'll have access, we've heard this before. Yanno what? I have "access" to luxurious yachts, builders all over the world will sell me one no matter what I am or believe, I just have to pay the bill.

 

Guess who doesn't own a ****ing yacht

 

Evil CBO and their diabolical doublespeak.

[@DCGoldPants]

3 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Well certainly this week the messaging MUST BE focused on stopping the repeal bill and nothing else.  Also, Twitter is not the ideal medium to have a policy discussion, character limits and all.  I get the email blasts from my senators and congressman (in VA), they always have stuff in there.  

 

It's ideal for short videos that can be easily liked and shared.

[ABQCOWBOY]

6 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

 

Ohhh, ACCESS! Yeah, they'll have access, we've heard this before. Yanno what? I have "access" to luxurious yachts, builders all over the world will sell me one no matter what I am or believe, I just have to pay the bill.

 

Guess who doesn't own a ****ing yacht

 

I'm sympathetic.  Guess who has insurance but can't get prescriptions covered or doctor visits scheduled?  Believe me, I get it.

[PleaseBlitz]

16 minutes ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

The Right is not lying when they say Obama care will fold in on itself if a massive infusion of money is not approved.  Too many insurance companies are pulling out because the Federal Government is no longer subsidizing these Insurance Companies and lets face it, these Insurance Companies were not exactly approving claims left and right.  Their job is to deny claims, not approve them. 

 

According to the CBO, and I will say that I am not a fan of the CBO, 22 million will not have insurance, not health care.  It will also save over 700 Billion over a period of 10 years.   The real question that needs to be asked is how Americans view these two options.  If all you are doing is framing this question in a manner that says, 22 million will lose healthcare, which is not true.  They will no longer be covered by insurance, but that doesn't mean they will lose healthcare, that's an incomplete depiction.  You have to balance it with what it's going to cost going forward and also, what kind of service you are actually going to receive.  That's the only fair way to ask the question IMO.

 

According to the CBO, the Obamacare markets are stable.  So, if you believe the CBO over "the right" then you are incorrect.

 

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52752

 

Quote

Under Current Law. Although premiums have been rising under current law, most subsidized enrollees purchasing health insurance coverage in the nongroup market are largely insulated from increases in premiums because their out-of-pocket payments for premiums are based on a percentage of their income; the government pays the difference between that percentage and the premiums for a reference plan. The subsidies to purchase coverage, combined with the effects of the individual mandate, which requires most individuals to obtain insurance or pay a penalty, are anticipated to cause sufficient demand for insurance by enough people, including people with low health care expenditures, for the market to be stable in most areas.

 

I honestly have no idea where you are getting your information from, the CBO also did not say that it will save over $700 billion over a decade, the figure is $321 billion for the Senate version (versus $119 billion for the House version).  

Edited June 27, 2017 by PleaseBlitz

[ABQCOWBOY]

1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

According to the CBO, the Obamacare markets are stable.  So, if you believe the CBO over "the right" then you are incorrect.

 

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52752

 

 

 

Well, if you are suggesting that what you posted refutes what I posted, I respectfully say that you are wrong.  All that says is that people who can't afford to pay the premiums that the rest of us are paying are protected under the ACA.  It doesn't say that Heath Insurance providers are not pulling out, it doesn't say that costs are escalating and it doesn't provide any answers for the poor service we are paying for with more expensive healthcare costs.  As I said, in order for the ACA to survive, a massive influx of money most happen but we still have no guarantee that the actual ability to deliver better healthcare is on the horizon.  It's the difference between having insurance and actually receiving quality care.

 

That's really the problem for the masses to me.  They get healthcare and insurance confused.   This debate is really a question of fiscal consequences.  It's not about providing healthcare at all because the ACA doesn't really do that.  It just makes sure that you are covered. 

[Springfield]

My employer got notice today that our current insurance will no longer participate after December due to uncertainty in ACA.  This will make the 5th different insurance I've had over the last 10 years.

 

Blue Cross

Kaiser

Aetna Innovation

Federated Cigna

...

Whatever comes next.

[PleaseBlitz]

8 minutes ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

Well, if you are suggesting that what you posted refutes what I posted, I respectfully say that you are wrong.  All that says is that people who can't afford to pay the premiums that the rest of us are paying are protected under the ACA.  It doesn't say that Heath Insurance providers are not pulling out, it doesn't say that costs are escalating and it doesn't provide any answers for the poor service we are paying for with more expensive healthcare costs.  As I said, in order for the ACA to survive, a massive influx of money most happen but we still have no guarantee that the actual ability to deliver better healthcare is on the horizon.  It's the difference between having insurance and actually receiving quality care.

 

That's really the problem for the masses to me.  They get healthcare and insurance confused.   This debate is really a question of fiscal consequences.  It's not about providing healthcare at all because the ACA doesn't really do that.  It just makes sure that you are covered. 

 

 

You said, quote: "The Right is not lying when they say Obama care will fold in on itself if a massive infusion of money is not approved."  The CBO says that this is not the case and that the Obamacare markets are stable in most areas (no massive infusion of money required).  As i quoted verbatim and in bold above.

 

You also said, quote: "It will also save over 700 Billion over a period of 10 years."  The CBO said that the Senate bill (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52849) will save $321 billion over 10 years.  The exact quote is "CBO and JCT estimate that, over the 2017-2026 period, enacting this legislation would reduce direct spending by $1,022 billion and reduce revenues by $701 billion, for a net reduction of $321 billion in the deficit over that period."

 

So yea, what i posted refutes what you posted, directly. 

Edited June 27, 2017 by PleaseBlitz

[LD0506]

So just for future reference, where should I look to find an oncologist that will accept chickens in payment? 

[Weganator]

4 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

So just for future reference, where should I look to find an oncologist that will accept chickens in payment? 

Venezuela? Might find one educated w/ the free college but dealing with the failed state famines.

[ABQCOWBOY]

3 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

 

You said, quote: "The Right is not lying when they say Obama care will fold in on itself if a massive infusion of money is not approved."  The CBO says that this is not the case and that the Obamacare markets are stable in most areas (no massive infusion of money required).  As i quoted verbatim and in bold above.

 

You also said, quote: "It will also save over 700 Billion over a period of 10 years."  The CBO said that the Senate bill (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52849) will save $321 billion over 10 years.  The exact quote is "CBO and JCT estimate that, over the 2017-2026 period, enacting this legislation would reduce direct spending by $1,022 billion and reduce revenues by $701 billion, for a net reduction of $321 billion in the deficit over that period."

 

So yea, what i posted refutes what you posted, directly. 

 

What you posted here, seems to be the CBO on the new healthcare plan, not the ACA currently in place.  I'm confused here. 

[Kilmer17]

Before Obamacare, America had a serious issue regarding health care.  It cost more than everyone was willing to pay to make sure everyone had coverage.  Under Obamacare, the exact same issue still exists.  Under Trumpcare, the exact same issue still exists.

 

Nobody on either side is talking about addressing the actual issues regarding healthcare in the US.  

[Springfield]

2 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Before Obamacare, America had a serious issue regarding health care.  It cost more than everyone was willing to pay to make sure everyone had coverage.  Under Obamacare, the exact same issue still exists.  Under Trumpcare, the exact same issue still exists.

 

Nobody on either side is talking about addressing the actual issues regarding healthcare in the US.  

 

Yes.

 

How to fix that?

 

My answer is to take capitalism out of it.

Edited June 27, 2017 by Springfield

[PleaseBlitz]

1 minute ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

What you posted here, seems to be the CBO on the new healthcare plan, not the ACA currently in place.  I'm confused here. 

 

My apologies.  If you look at my post above (now quoted below), you'll note that the CBO compares the ACA to the new healthcare plans.  Where is says "Under Current Law" (in bold below) that means Obamacare.  You'll then note that discussing the current law/Obamacare, it states that they anticipate markets to be stable in most areas as the law is currently written (and with no mention of a need for a massive influx of money).

 

27 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

According to the CBO, the Obamacare markets are stable.  So, if you believe the CBO over "the right" then you are incorrect.

 

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52752

 

  Quote

Under Current Law. Although premiums have been rising under current law, most subsidized enrollees purchasing health insurance coverage in the nongroup market are largely insulated from increases in premiums because their out-of-pocket payments for premiums are based on a percentage of their income; the government pays the difference between that percentage and the premiums for a reference plan. The subsidies to purchase coverage, combined with the effects of the individual mandate, which requires most individuals to obtain insurance or pay a penalty, are anticipated to cause sufficient demand for insurance by enough people, including people with low health care expenditures, for the market to be stable in most areas.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

Before Obamacare, America had a serious issue regarding health care.  It cost more than everyone was willing to pay to make sure everyone had coverage.  Under Obamacare, the exact same issue still exists.  Under Trumpcare, the exact same issue still exists.

 

Nobody on either side is talking about addressing the actual issues regarding healthcare in the US.  

 

Exactly right.  To me, if actual healthcare is not provided, why then should we pay more in Healthcare expenses?  That just does not make sense to me.  I'd rather go back to how it was because then, at least I got heathcare provided for my family and I, even if it costed more.  Now, I have the costs but not actual service.

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

 

Yes.

 

How to fix that?

 

My answer is to take capitalism out of it.

That's been my answer as well.  But again, that's not what either side is talking about.

[PleaseBlitz]

4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Before Obamacare, America had a serious issue regarding health care.  It cost more than everyone was willing to pay to make sure everyone had coverage.  Under Obamacare, the exact same issue still exists.  Under Trumpcare, the exact same issue still exists.

 

Nobody on either side is talking about addressing the actual issues regarding healthcare in the US.  

 

Hopefully that will be the next phase after (hopefully) the Senate bill dies.  And involve a transparent process with lots of healthcare policy experts, not divas triangulating their reelection chances.  

[Springfield]

Just now, Kilmer17 said:

That's been my answer as well.  But again, that's not what either side is talking about.

 

Then we agree.  Cheers to health care that costs a ****ton! (That's the actual amount)

Just now, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Hopefully that will be the next phase after (hopefully) the Senate bill dies.  And involve a transparent process with lots of healthcare policy experts, not divas triangulating their reelection chances.  

 

I'm skeptical considering the controlling party.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Let's not forget that the ACA originally had a public option.  It was removed under threat of filibuster by Senator Droopy Dog.

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm about to address my healthcare issues.  This means I am sneaking out of work and going to the gym.

[FanboyOf91]

 

[Cooked Crack]

Keep the pressure on these asses. We've already had this happen in the House. Watch them come back with some compromise that lets people save face.

[ABQCOWBOY]

1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

My apologies.  If you look at my post above (now quoted below), you'll note that the CBO compares the ACA to the new healthcare plans.  Where is says "Under Current Law" (in bold below) that means Obamacare.  You'll then note that discussing the current law/Obamacare, it states that they anticipate markets to be stable in most areas as the law is currently written (and with no mention of a need for a massive influx of money).

 

 

 

Respectfully, I do not agree with this.  In particular, Bolded. 

 

In fact, significant increased taxation are coming, so while Obamacare might not have to be rewritten, it's still going to require a huge increase in money and higher taxes, which is what I said in the first place.  The problem here is that the CBO takes into account, folks who are getting subsidies for ACA coverage.  It does not reflect the costs associated by those who must bare the weight of those increases.  

 

This of course, says nothing about the actual service provided.  There are not enough facilities, not enough healthcare assets to provide proper care and this is not addressed in the CBO, so far as I can tell.  Just to get quality healthcare, we have to sink in stupid amounts of money to build and train the proper facilities and personnel. 

 

I just don't agree.  The CBO has been way wrong about healthcare but that is because it reflects data that is submitted and not all data.  You can't depend on it because all too often, it's used as a tool by one side or the other to try and force legislation.  Cost will escalate over the next few years, even more then it already has.  This is about to become very painful for a lot of Americans.

[TradeTheBeal!]

59 minutes ago, FanboyOf91 said:

 

 

This will give the GOP the time it needs to make the bill even more evil.