***Official Political Discussion Thread***

1000


futile at this point, Trump can just summon up executive privilege.

Learn civics. It is a petition, he can just ignore it because he wants to ignore it.

And the executive can release his tax returns if he wanted too. Obama did.
 
Last edited:
So I'd have to assume that under this new plan the premiums will decrease. I mean, if they don't decrease what difference will it these "changes" actually make?

The name. Remember, majority of people didn't even realize that the ACA and Obamacare were the same thing, not hard to pull one over on the millions of ignorant folks in this country.
 
Last edited:


futile at this point, Trump can just summon up executive privilege.

Learn civics. It is a petition, he can just ignore it because he wants to ignore it.

And the executive can release his tax returns if he wanted too. Obama did.

there it is.

Then admit your papi is just hiding something. Not that he has some legit reason for not keeping with tradition.
 
Last edited:


futile at this point, Trump can just summon up executive privilege.

Learn civics. It is a petition, he can just ignore it because he wants to ignore it.

And the executive can release his tax returns if he wanted too. Obama did.

there it is.

Then admit your papi is just hiding something. Not that he has some legit reason for not keeping with tradition.

thats not what im getting at. what i am getting at is da end game. da tax returns ain't gonna get shown if he doesn't want em out there, there's no mechanism thats gonna force him to disclose em.
 
Since the ACA is about to die, one thing has to be cleared up, because Republicans have once again done a great job controlling the message of the ACA.

-First, most reasonable people know what makes the ACA good, which are mainly the pro consumer regulations. Preexisting conditions protections (which is the most important thing in the law), the Medicaid expansion (which would have been even more beneficial if it was for sws GOP governors), staying on your parents insurance, and so forth.

-Anyone that tried to buy a private plan before the ACA (i did), knows things are better now and cheaper. Great private plans back in the day were nearly impossible to get most of the time, and many times offered crap coverage if you found something reasonable.

--------------------------

Now onto the premium jump. Healthcare care cost and premiums had been rising a lot year by year before the ACA, the difference is that most people didn't see it, because most people that had health insurance was on an employer plan. so employers either ate the cost, got tax subsidies to cover it to passed it onto the worker with lower wages (employer health insurance is a form of compensation, it is not a reward for working like many people foolishly believe)

When the ACA marketplace first started, plans were really affordable, had low payments, and reasonable deductibles. A couple things changes:

-First now because so many people were on private plans ( which may be directly subsidized by the government) the TRUE cost of health care inflation was seen. Healthcare cost are r

-The first year the marketplace opened up stop, insurers price their health insurance plans a lil lower than market cost to attract those young healthy marginal customers. This is where the money in any kind of insurance is, so since there where many companies competing for customers, you got a large variety of plans at reasonable prices.

This is the beauty of capitalism, when you have competition, consumers benefit. The places where consumers have the most options, especially this year, saw the lowest increase in prices. The places where there are one one or two option, the insurers had no incentive to compete, and prices sky rocket.

Obama tried to scream this at people when he was pushing the public option. He even made the comparison of the reason why you don't get screwed by UPS or Fedex is because you have a cheap universal option in the Post Office. And that is a good example because UPS and Fedex lobby to keep the Post Office kinda ****** because they know if it was well funded, and affordable, it would wipe away some much of their business.

Health insurance companies feared the same thing.

So the alternative was funding non profit health coops in places where the wouldn't be much competition. These were great at the beginning, and offered affordable plans. The GOP during every budget debate attacked these non profits by cutting funds (they had already been promised) to force them to die.

-Now here is want happen to lead us to the big jumps this year. First off the mandate is too weak, too many people chose to pay the penalty (which equals about what ou would have paid for a bronze plan on the marketplace). Now that tax penalty helps fund the system, but it doesn't incentivize people to actually buy the insurance, strengthening the pool of people paying in, which would have made the plans profitable, and cause insurers to say in the marketplace and compete.

I don't care if you're the best driver in the world. You're never gonna get a decent car insurance plan if other great non-accident having drivers choose not buy car insurance. Car insurance companies would start losing money, some will stop stealing in states, and cost will rise dramctically.

There is a relatively severe punishment for driving without insurance, there wasn't one for living without health insurance. Every other country that does health insurance the social insurance way has a very harsh mandate. Because it is necessary. Even right wing economist say this

-Now the creators of the ACA are not dumb, they kinda tried to protect companies from this my having a system where health insurers can recoup money they loss from. It was the GOP, lead by Lil Marco Rubio, that peep this system and saw a way to try to force the law into a death spiral.

You can read about it here. LINK

When the Obama administration was crafting Obamacare, it came up with a crony capitalist solution to entice reluctant insurers to join the exchanges. Many insurers worried that there would not be enough healthy people paying in to cover the costs of sick people. So the administration created a “risk corridor” program to help prop up insurers who lost money in the first three years of the law. Profitable insurers would pay some of those profits into a pool to help insurers who lost money. If the amount insurers lost exceeded what the companies paid in, the government would step in and make up the difference.

Calling this “a taxpayer-funded bailout for insurance companies,” Rubio last year quietly inserted language into the omnibus government spending bill that barred the Department of Health and Human Services from dipping into general funds to pay failing insurers. “While the Obama administration can still administer the risk-corridor program, for one year at least, they won’t be able to use taxpayer funds to bail out insurance companies,” Rubio said.

His provision sparked little opposition at the time, but it has proved to be a poison pill that is killing Obamacare from within.

Last year, insurers lost $2.9 billion more than expected on Obamacare. But insurers had paid only $362 million into the program — leaving it more than $2.5 billion short. Thanks to Rubio’s provision, the administration was allowed to pay only 13 cents of every dollar insurers requested. Without the taxpayer bailouts, more than half of the Obamacare insurance cooperatives created under the law failed. One, Health Republic of Oregon, was expecting a $7.9 million bailout from the government. Instead, thanks to Rubio, it got only $995,000 — not a penny of it from the taxpayers. The Oregon co-op announced in October it was closing its doors. Soon, two other insurers — WinHealth Partners in Wyoming and Moda Health in Washington state — pulled out of the exchanges. And United Healthcare, one of the nation’s largest insurers, announced that it may leave the Obamacare exchanges in 2016. If that happens, and other insurers follow United’s lead, that could spell disaster for Obamacare.

This cause companies to exit and really jack up prices more because now not only were not enough healthy people singing up, they were gonna get health covering the sick ones.

It was people buying from the marketplace but made to much for subsides in a handle full of states that really got screwed.

--And all this, let must remember, effected a smaller portion of people than what the law helped. The law could have been easily patched. Used some idea from Clinton's plan, and then use some ideas from the Bush Administration's fixing of Medicare Advantage. I could go into this, but this post is already too damb long. :lol:

So instead of helping maintain a system that helped so many, the GOP worked tirelessly to rob people of their help insurance for 7 years.

And all during this time, they didn't ******* bother to propose something else that would have worked better.

-That is because that there is only one system out their that can beat even a left wing reformed well funded ACA, and it the system we should have put into place decades ago when Ted Kennedy told us to.................God Damb Single Payer

So you're saying the negatives of the ACA are a direct effect of Republicans? That they actually created these obstacles then touted them as negatives to a gullible public?
 
CNN abruptly cutting Ashley Judd's mic off :lol:

i wish they would've just played w/e that kook had to say in full and in context so u can marvel at da delusional diatribe.
 
The Guardian@guardian 3h3 hours ago


 



Canadians traveling to Women's March denied US entry after sharing their planshttp://trib.al/IR5dkyx 


 

I am pretty sure that by the end of Trump's term (IF it ends), American passport holders will lose their ability to travel visa-free in many countries.

I also suspect that the US will break up within this century. There are just too many fundamental differences between the two main factions for this country to stay "united."
 
So you're saying the negatives of the ACA are a direct effect of Republicans? That they actually created these obstacles then touted them as negatives to a gullible public?

Isn't that what they always do?

Disinforming the populace and making government (state and federal) agencies toothless by denying them funding is how they prove that "government doesn't work."

It's only when you realize that that you understand how they are always arguing in bad faith. They're not honest people, and they do not look after the interests of Americans; they only care about their donors. Unfortunately, most Americans don't care to observe the inner workings of their government, they embrace ignorance and apathy, and they allow the **** to go on.
 
Last edited:
The Guardian@guardian 3h3 hours ago


 



Canadians traveling to Women's March denied US entry after sharing their planshttp://trib.al/IR5dkyx 


 
The group was brought in for secondary processing, where the border agent asked about their political views, Decunha told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “The first thing he asked us point blank is, ‘Are you anti- or pro-Trump?’”


"DAY DAMN ONE!" From Uncle Phil on Fresh Prince was basically the reaction I had.

Kim Jong Donald is already at it...
 
Last edited:
The Guardian@guardian 3h3 hours ago


 



Canadians traveling to Women's March denied US entry after sharing their planshttp://trib.al/IR5dkyx 


 
The group was brought in for secondary processing, where the border agent asked about their political views, Decunha told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “The first thing he asked us point blank is, ‘Are you anti- or pro-Trump?’”


"DAY DAMN ONE!" From Uncle Phil on Fresh Prince was basically the reaction I had.

Kim Jong Donald is already at it...

This important because things like this only happen in dictatorships.

Expect cities like Chicago to take a bigger hit as their economy is heavily reliant on tourist dollars.
 
Just saw this



Not even mad in the least :lol:

The Guardian@guardian 3h3 hours ago


 



Canadians traveling to Women's March denied US entry after sharing their planshttp://trib.al/IR5dkyx 


 
The group was brought in for secondary processing, where the border agent asked about their political views, Decunha told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “The first thing he asked us point blank is, ‘Are you anti- or pro-Trump?’”


"DAY DAMN ONE!" From Uncle Phil on Fresh Prince was basically the reaction I had.

Kim Jong Donald is already at it...

This important because things like this only happen in dictatorships.

Expect cities like Chicago to take a bigger hit as their economy is heavily reliant on tourist dollars.

I was just talking about this with a friend from Iraq,dude says that kind of stuff only happens in a dictatorship . Legit taking political views into account before letting folks into the country? :x :x

Was also reading about how the most pro-Trump groups are basically most of the national security related departments like, the FBI,Military,Police etc,scary signs early on :smh:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom