Why Trump Should NOT Repeal or Replace ObamaCare (Just Let It Die)

[Emjay]

Kill it with fire.

And salt the ground !

[Jazzhead]

Ever notice liberals here and elsewhere always talk about 'the groups that benefit from Obamacare" but rarely get specific? Thats because Obamacare benefits people like those that give them power. The gay lobby. The Muslim lobby.

That's simply too stupid and ignorant a comment to merit a response.

Care to list the "good" from the ACA?

Preexisting conditions requires the mandate or no one would buy insurance until after they need care.

As far as lowering costs for some - it is because it is medical welfare forcing other people to pay for their lower costs. The ACA didn't lower costs, it just further shifted the costs to the people who were already paying their way.

There are two primary groups that have benefited from the ACA:

   -  The working poor who (depending on the state) qualify for subsidies or expanded Medicaid.  These include folks at small employers who don't offer health insurance,  and folks working two or more part-time jobs, none of which qualify them for employer-provided health insurance.

   -  White males over the age of 50 who were laid off in the last recession.   These folks, prior to the ACA,  were stuck with COBRA,  which is expensive and only lasts for 18 months.   They often could not qualify for individual insurance,  or couldn't afford such insurance, because of pre-existing medical issues.   The ACA insurance marketplace has been a lifesaver for older males,  because it allows them a bridge to Medicare at affordable rates (remember,  a key ACA change is the 3 to 1 rule that requires insurance for older Americans to be priced at no more than 3 times the cost of insurance for millenials.  Of course, that's the rule that has made ACA insurance a bad deal for healthy younger folks,  thereby creating the current ACA "death spiral".)

  DB, you're absolutely right about the need for the individual mandate - no private insurance system can survive for long if one needn't purchase insurance unless and until one gets sick.   If that "fascist mandate" must go,  then the obvious alternative will be single payer.   Conservatives may well need to rethink their opposition to single payer.  For example,  if health care insurance is financed by means of general tax revenues,  then employers will be relieved of the burden of running expensive health care plans,  thus making the employment of Americans less expensive on the margin.     

[Bigun]

Oh, that's easy.
They get to be The Great and Powerful Oz!
Benefactor of all the little people who should do all they want them to out of fawning gratitude for their boundless wisdom. (Otherwise they turn and sic the winged monkeys on you!)

It's all part of their superiority complex.

 

[skeeter]

That's simply too stupid and ignorant a comment to merit a response.



There are two primary groups that have benefited from the ACA:

*clip*

   -  White males over the age of 50 who were laid off in the last recession.   These folks, prior to the ACA,  were stuck with COBRA,  which is expensive and only lasts for 18 months.   They often could not qualify for individual insurance,  or couldn't afford such insurance, because of pre-existing medical issues.   The ACA insurance marketplace has been a lifesaver for older males,  because it allows them a bridge to Medicare at affordable rates (remember,  a key ACA change is the 3 to 1 rule that requires insurance for older Americans to be priced at no more than 3 times the cost of insurance for millenials.  Of course, that's the rule that has made ACA insurance a bad deal for healthy younger folks,  thereby creating the current ACA "death spiral".)

Of course we'll never know how many more of these aged +50 are unemployed BECAUSE of ACA. I suspect its a significant number.

That is the nature of big government - create a problem then propose it's solution.

[Norm Lenhart]

That's simply too stupid and ignorant a comment to merit a response.

Whats the matter Jazzy? Don't like what the mirror shows you? Or to be more precise, don't like other people seeing through your BS?

It's funny how often you resort to that catch phrase of yours when someone points out the truth.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

That's simply too stupid and ignorant a comment to merit a response.



There are two primary groups that have benefited from the ACA:

   -  The working poor who (depending on the state) qualify for subsidies or expanded Medicaid.  These include folks at small employers who don't offer health insurance,  and folks working two or more part-time jobs, none of which qualify them for employer-provided health insurance.

   -  White males over the age of 50 who were laid off in the last recession.   These folks, prior to the ACA,  were stuck with COBRA,  which is expensive and only lasts for 18 months.   They often could not qualify for individual insurance,  or couldn't afford such insurance, because of pre-existing medical issues.   The ACA insurance marketplace has been a lifesaver for older males,  because it allows them a bridge to Medicare at affordable rates (remember,  a key ACA change is the 3 to 1 rule that requires insurance for older Americans to be priced at no more than 3 times the cost of insurance for millenials.  Of course, that's the rule that has made ACA insurance a bad deal for healthy younger folks,  thereby creating the current ACA "death spiral".)

  DB, you're absolutely right about the need for the individual mandate - no private insurance system can survive for long if one needn't purchase insurance unless and until one gets sick.   If that "fascist mandate" must go,  then the obvious alternative will be single payer.   Conservatives may well need to rethink their opposition to single payer.  For example,  if health care insurance is financed by means of general tax revenues,  then employers will be relieved of the burden of running expensive health care plans,  thus making the employment of Americans less expensive on the margin.   

You cannot have single payer without massive taxation, and Americans simply will never sign on to that level of taxation.


Single payer is a dead issue.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

I actually tried to get elected as a state rep here some years ago.  What I  found out was that most of those out there shoutin "truth truth  tell me the truth" really don't want that at all.  What they really want is for you to confirm what they already think and call that the truth.

Ain't that the truth.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I had a dear friend who was born in England and came over as a war bride (WW II).  She made a life here and had a very good job as a bank executive.  But she always had that nostalgia for England and decided to go back to be with family and be where health care was paid for and available.

It wasn't 3 months until I got a letter from her.  So sad.  Her family was not as supportive as she had hoped.  She had been out of their lives too long.  She sold everything she had to get over there and the health care was the worst.  She could NOT get health care.  It took her a year to save up enough to get back.  She told me it was the worst mistake she'd ever made.

I lived in UK thirty+ years ago and recall the experience with healthcare.

One story I read about was a woman complaining of pain in her stomach.  They found some forceps still residing there that were not removed during some abominable surgery she had years before.

Another one is an American couple I knew who came over as expats with some kids, one of which had a condition which was serious but treatable.

The child came down ill and was taken to the hospital for treatment.  Drs said they wanted to keep him overnight for observation, but parents could not stay.

The next day they returned only to find the room their child was in empty.  When they asked where he was, they were non-nonchalantly told that the boy had a seizure during the night and died.

No, we do not need government-run healthcare in this USA.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Every group in Britain benefits from their universal healthcare. They universally wait months for cancer treatments and such. Every man woman and child in Canada benefits from their socialist healthcare. thats why they USED to flood across the border to get treated in American facilities for cash.

Some people simply want liberalism. No matter who it kills.

When I lived in Britain as an expat, my wife came down with the flu and called the clinic for an appointment.

When she spoke with them, they asked whether she would be public or private.  My wife asked why, and was told if she was public, then the next appointment she could make was two weeks to see the dr.  If private, she could come in right away.

That is just plain awful, and being in the 'public' sure does not benefit those having private insurance.

[CSM]

Agreed, and this is why it's a mistake to say the US health care system is "the best in the world". It has it's good points, but a lot of bad ones too.

Actually, the US health care system IS the best in the world.  That is born out to be true when any objective measurement is used.  I do agree that NO system is perfect.  However, free market capitalism is the closest that man can get to perfection.

The vast majority (99.9999999%) of the problems in the health care industry are directly attributable to government meddling. 

[CSM]

This article -- like so many others -- completely misses the point on ObamaCare.  The core of it is not the individual mandate.  The core of it is the expansion of Medicaid, which essentially made health care for everyone an entitlement.

Actually, if you take it one step further you will find that the "core" of Obamacare is wealth redistribution. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2Kevz_9lsw

"Any health care funding plan that is just equitable civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional."  -Donald Berwick

[CSM]

Part of the problem with health care costs in general has to do with the whole "insurance model" of medical care.  There is no "free market" in medicine -- it's already controlled by large, inefficient, and intractable corporate bureaucracies.  A single-payer system doesn't fundamentally change the economics of the current system, except probably to make it even less responsive.

Yes, but we must not forget that the current, or most recent, issues that exist in the insurance market are directly attributable to the HMO regulations that Ted Kennedy pushed in the 80's. 

[/quote]
There is a good moral argument to be made for ensuring that everybody gets some basic and sufficient level of care.  Probably the least intrusive approach would be some sort of means-tested subsidy for plans that meet some basic standards of service; and those subsidies are almost certainly best applied at the state rather than national level.
[/quote]

Exactly, but I would say that the moral solution to the moral argument of taking care of each other is that it be handled privately.  The most effective organizations that help the downtrodden are private charities!  Remember, that is how society created hospitals in the first place!

[Just_Victor]

And salt the ground !

Have I told you recently that I love you?

[Suppressed]

When she spoke with them, they asked whether she would be public or private.  My wife asked why, and was told if she was public, then the next appointment she could make was two weeks to see the dr.  If private, she could come in right away.

Isn't that the system being advocated by many?  That those with means can pay, but that there's a safety net for all?

[CSM]

Why should Idaho's rules be trumped by a Federal rule that allows an Idaho resident to purchase insurance not sanctioned by the state of Idaho?   

Actually, as a Citizen of the United States of America, I am free to buy any legal product from any state that has voluntarily entered into the union.  This is the original intention of the Commerce Clause.  States cannot restrict trade with other states.  (Well, originally they couldn't, however in a post-constitution America, we see differently.)

[CSM]

I don't disagree, but believe that the ACA can be FIXED to address its worst failures.  But if we're not going to enforce the "fascist mandate",  then the alternative is single payer.   

In other words, you are a progressive.  Why else would you put fascist mandate in quotes?  It is the government DICTATING to me that I MUST buy a product from a private company.  If I am not free to NOT participate in commerce, then I am NOT free at all.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

In other words, you are a progressive.  Why else would you put fascist mandate in quotes?  It is the government DICTATING to me that I MUST buy a product from a private company.  If I am not free to NOT participate in commerce, then I am NOT free at all.

It's kind of like taxing breathing. Out of work - too bad pay up. Small business owner in hard times - too bad pay up. The government is so compassionate. The government should learn that no means no they don't get to screw the people whenever they feel like it. 

[CSM]

It's kind of like taxing breathing. Out of work - too bad pay up. Small business owner in hard times - too bad pay up. The government is so compassionate. The government should learn that no means no they don't get to screw the people whenever they feel like it.

Did you watch the CNN debate between Cruz and Sanders?  One small business owner asked Bernie how she is supposed to afford to insure her employees without increasing prices or lowering wages.  He shrugged his shoulders and basically told her, "well, you won't like it, but I think you should have to buy insurance for your employees."

He offered no solution, just an empty suit shoulder shrug.

[Jazzhead]

In other words, you are a progressive.  Why else would you put fascist mandate in quotes?  It is the government DICTATING to me that I MUST buy a product from a private company.  If I am not free to NOT participate in commerce, then I am NOT free at all.

I put "fascist mandate" in quotes not because I am a "progressive", but because I was quoting another - the article linked to in the opening post. 

Idiot. 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I put "fascist mandate" in quotes not because I am a "progressive", but because I was quoting another - the article linked to in the opening post. 

Idiot.

Same old same old. If you don't agree with me you're a "progressive". Blah blah.

[r9etb]

I put "fascist mandate" in quotes not because I am a "progressive", but because I was quoting another - the article linked to in the opening post. 

I appreciate your willingness to espouse and defend different viewpoints on various topics.  While I often disagree with you, the give-and-take is nevertheless an opportunity to assess the clarity of my own views, and to correct them if needed. 

There are some folks who aren't interested in even considering other points of view, much less discussing their differences politely.

Keep up the good fight.

[Just_Victor]

I appreciate your willingness to espouse and defend different viewpoints on various topics.  While I often disagree with you, the give-and-take is nevertheless an opportunity to assess the clarity of my own views, and to correct them if needed. 

There are some folks who aren't interested in even considering other points of view, much less discussing their differences politely.

Keep up the good fight.

Here here...or hear hear. ..  or here hear...  or hear here...
Can't find a emot...

[Smokin Joe]

Ain't that the truth.

I recall a conversation in which i had proposed a simple, fair, and inexpensive solution to a problem to my State Senator. He just looked at me, shook his head and said. "That's a great idea, but they'll never go for it in Bismarck". "Why not?", I asked. He replied, "Because it makes sense."

He was right, they didn't go for it.

[Smokin Joe]

In other words, you are a progressive.  Why else would you put fascist mandate in quotes?  It is the government DICTATING to me that I MUST buy a product from a private company.  If I am not free to NOT participate in commerce, then I am NOT free at all.

Well, that falls into line with Government forcing someone to sell something they don't want to to someone, which the poster supports also, only that only applies to mom and pop bakers and florists, not the K-street health care gang, which got the taxpayer funded out written in. In the end, a lot of people lost their insurance, for many of us, about the same time work dried up.

[kevindavis007]

Here is the thing what happens if Obamacare crashes and burn say in 2021 and the Democrats is back in power?