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

[CSM]

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.

@r9etb Are you implying that I was not polite in my responses to you or to others?  If so, that was not my intention and if you can direct me to what may be rude, I'd be more than willing to restate my position and I will try to make it polite to others.

Why did you leave off the part of @Jazzhead 's post where he calls me an idiot?

[skeeter]

@skeeter

That's not the whole issue, though. 

We couldn't keep putting the burden on the ERs.

True, but besides the EMTALA there are a multitude of health care programs for the poor & disadvantaged - Kerr-Mills, Medicare, Medicaid, Neighbor-hood Health Center Program of the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Community Mental Health Center Act, the Migrant Health Act, the Children and Youth and Maternal and Infant Care Amendments to the Social Security Act, the National Health Service Corps, etc. Then there are the state programs.

The poor have not been deprived of healthcare in this country for decades. ACA isn't about that.

[Bigun]

True, but besides the EMTALA there are a multitude of health care programs for the poor & disadvantaged - Kerr-Mills, Medicare, Medicaid, Neighbor-hood Health Center Program of the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Community Mental Health Center Act, the Migrant Health Act, the Children and Youth and Maternal and Infant Care Amendments to the Social Security Act, the National Health Service Corps, etc. Then there are the state programs.

The poor have not been deprived of healthcare in this country for decades. ACA isn't about that.

Cannot be said too often or too forcefully!

[CSM]

The working poor who are not so fortunate...."

The vast majority of "working poor" are the young.  They are just beginning their productive lives and as a result they have not accumulated the experience, knowledge or wisdom that makes their productivity (labor, intellect) worth the highest pay.  In addition, they have not had time to accumulate savings, benefit from compounding or other ways of building wealth.  It makes complete sense that the young would not be as wealthy as generations older than they are. 

In addition, the same "working poor" are much healthier as a group, therefore their health care needs are exponentially smaller than those older generations that have had the physical tole of life ravage them physically for decades.

So, it is a double edged sword, the older one gets the wealthier they should be, yet they will need more medical services due to the physical wear and tear of life. 

The ACA, with it's mandate, actually transfers much of the elderly's cost to the young.  That is the point of the entire system.  As a result, it is very effective at transferring money from the "working poor" to the wealthier generations.  That is actually evil to the core.

Would you agree with me that we should not be transferring wealth from these young folks that are just beginning their working careers to the older generations that have had time to accumulate wealth? 

[r9etb]

Are you implying that I was not polite in my responses to you or to others?  If so, that was not my intention and if you can direct me to what may be rude, I'd be more than willing to restate my position and I will try to make it polite to others.

Why did you leave off the part of @Jazzhead 's post where he calls me an idiot?

Eh, I just picked that particular one to reply to.  Sorry to have upset you.

As to the "idiot" comment ... Considering the moronic crap that some people have been tossing at him on this and other threads, I cut him a little slack.  The guy is honest about his beliefs, and willing to discuss them at length and in depth.  I respect that.

[CSM]

Eh, I just picked that particular one to reply to.  Sorry to have upset you.

As to the "idiot" comment ... Considering the moronic crap that some people have been tossing at him on this and other threads, I cut him a little slack.  The guy is honest about his beliefs, and willing to discuss them at length and in depth.  I respect that.

OK, thank you for the clarification.  I appreciate it.

I try very hard, and am mostly successful, to be polite here.  However, there are times that I fail and do appreciate being reminded and allowed to make any corrections. 

[Smokin Joe]

You know it's not responsible to blow something up when it's possible to fix it.   If that's the GOP's attitude, then it will be the recipient of the electoral consequences.   

The Dems are smiling and treating the ACA now as the GOP's tar baby.   I say it represents an opportunity to show our policy chops - the fixes I would propose are both simple and consistent with conservative principles.  But if the salt-the-ground radicals like you want your pyrrhic victory,  don't say I didn't warn you.   

Frankly, I have nothing to lose but a penalty for not having the damned insurance I lost because of the ACA. WTF are you going to take from me? My birthday?

[Taxcontrol]

Repeal - yes

Repair - no
Replace - no

[Jazzhead]

Repeal - yes

Repair - no
Replace - no

Don't forget to add this to your cogent analysis:

Electoral defeat for the GOP and conservatives - yes

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Don't forget to add this to your cogent analysis:

Electoral defeat for the GOP and conservatives - yes

Why? Obamacare was never supported by a majority and unless I've missed it the Dems aren't hanging their hat on poling showing how much everybody is enjoying their slavery under Obamacare.

[Jazzhead]

Frankly, I have nothing to lose but a penalty for not having the damned insurance I lost because of the ACA. WTF are you going to take from me? My birthday?

If you'd stop hyperventilating,  you'd recognize that I've acknowledged that among the collateral damage from the ACA was health options for the self-employed.   I support fixing the ACA to address that.

My post was referring to the political consequences of the salt-the-ground position - it would be a electoral disaster for conservatives.   But that's par for the course -  conservatives, I'm afraid,  love to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.   

[skeeter]

If you'd stop hyperventilating,  you'd recognize that I've acknowledged that among the collateral damage from the ACA was health options for the self-employed.   I support fixing the ACA to address that.

My post was referring to the political consequences of the salt-the-ground position - it would be a electoral disaster for conservatives.   But that's par for the course -  conservatives, I'm afraid,  love to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.   

So far you've identified two groups who support ACA a) the poor, and b) unemployed men over 50 (arguable).

Is this the unbeatable voting block that will throw republicans out of power?

[r9etb]

Why? Obamacare was never supported by a majority and unless I've missed it the Dems aren't hanging their hat on poling showing how much everybody is enjoying their slavery under Obamacare.

I think @Jazzhead 's point -- and it's valid -- is that if Republicans repealed but did not repair or replace, the Democrats can build a very effective "Republicans want poor people to die in the streets" platform. 

They're already going to be running against Trump, and "taking away basic health care from the poor" would be a great centerpiece.

[r9etb]

So far you've identified two groups who support ACA a) the poor, and b) unemployed men over 50 (arguable).

Is this the unbeatable voting block that will throw republicans out of power?

You're surely not that naive about how such issues can be exploited in an election year that already promises to be heated.

[skeeter]

You're surely not that naive about how such issues can be exploited in an election year that already promises to be heated.

We don't need to forecast how the issue will play with electorate, we've already seen it play out over the past two cycles.

And if you were paying attention you'll know it wasn't the ACA's supporters who came out on top.

[r9etb]

We don't need to forecast how the issue will play with electorate, we've already seen it play out over the past two cycles.

And if you were paying attention you'll know it wasn't the ACA's supporters who came out on top.

Perhaps.  More likely, you're just really naive.

[skeeter]

Perhaps.  More likely, you're just really naive.

I expected better from you.

[r9etb]

I expected better from you.

And I from you.  You're seemingly unable or unwilling to admit the truth of what JH is saying about the electoral uses to which the Democrats would put a refusal to replace or repair Obamacare.

It's a powerful tool that can be used to influence people who are already on the fence about Trump and the Republicans -- it's not just the old and the poor whose votes would be affected.

[truth_seeker]

And I from you.  You're seemingly unable or unwilling to admit the truth of what JH is saying about the electoral uses to which the Democrats would put a refusal to replace or repair Obamacare.

It's a powerful tool that can be used to influence people who are already on the fence about Trump and the Republicans -- it's not just the old and the poor whose votes would be affected.

How about the idea, that anti-Trumpers like you and JH have been wrong, all along.

So why credit you with suddenly possessing the source of all knowledge?

Besides, you have not even seen what the "replace" measure contains.

[r9etb]

How about the idea, that anti-Trumpers like you and JH have been wrong, all along.

So why credit you with suddenly possessing the source of all knowledge?

It's called "discussion," son.  It's only interesting and useful if people say and think differently from you. 

Your version of "discussion" looks suspiciously like masturbation.

Besides, you have not even seen what the "replace" measure contains.

Immaterial -- the discussion is about the political impact of what happens when neither repair or replace are on the table. 

[Idaho_Cowboy]

I'd say since Trump and the Republican rode the promise of repeal to Washington they better give serious thought to doing what they said they would do.

I've been wrong on a lot of what Trump was going to do. It's not time to worry yet.

[skeeter]

It's called "discussion," son.  It's only interesting and useful if people say and think differently from you. 

Your version of "discussion" looks suspiciously like masturbation.

Immaterial -- the discussion is about the political impact of what happens when neither repair or replace are on the table.

It looks to me like your idea of 'discussion' can also be called arguing for its own sake.

Its also a waste of time.

[r9etb]

I'd say since Trump and the Republican rode the promise of repeal to Washington they better give serious thought to doing what they said they would do.

I've been wrong on a lot of what Trump was going to do. It's not time to worry yet.

All Trump can really do is sign the legislation.  It's the Republicans in Congress who have the task of coming up with a way to actually deal with it in a way that doesn't kill them in 2018. 

Any solution that can plausibly be painted as causing large numbers of people to be denied medical care, is bad news for all of us.

Of course, we've already seen that very thing with the millions who lost their existing coverage under the ACA and were faced with ruinous cost increases.  But the media and Democrats were in "protect" mode back then; they're in attack mode, now. 

People are nervous about Trump.  If they stay nervous about Trump, then what the R's do on Obamacare is one club (not the only one) that can be used to beat GOP candidates over the head.

[r9etb]

It looks to me like your idea of 'discussion' can also be called arguing for its own sake.

Its also a waste of time.

I find that I expect less and less of you as this discussion goes forward.  Pity.

[Bigun]

Once one realizes that the ACA was never about healthcare but getting as many people onto the government plantation as possible there needs to be very little discussion about whether or not to get rid of it entirely IMHO!