Facing GOP opposition, Senate leaders postpone vote to overhaul Obamacare

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Trumpamania
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What legislation could Trump just magically push through that would fix ObamaCare? It's a cluster to the nth magnitude.

This is a loaded question if I ever saw it. There is no existing legislation to fix Obamacare, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be written or anything. Believe it or not, traditionally, the government worked to fix flawed but well meaning laws not scrap them and try to write their own version when the political sides flipped.

So in a nutshell you have no f'ing idea. Why don't the Dems write a fix? They are the ones that broke it and then told us how great it was going to be.

You are right "traditionally, the government worked to fix flawed but well meaning laws" but this one wasn't well meaning. It was a way for the government to take over 1/6th of the freaking economy and to control one of the very few things people actually need. What a nice way to make the subjects behave. As the Supreme Court decided, it is a FREAKING TAX!

God forbid if the government create the Affordable Food Act we will all be freaking starving to death.

originally posted by: Skorpy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Didn't the Dems have their turn already? I remember you got to vote on it before you can see it.

It's funny you say that, because if McConnell had had his way this bill would have been voted on JUST like that. Also, your rhetoric is inconsistent. You just got done trying to tell me that the Dems don't want to help. I disagreed and corrected you and now you are suggesting that the Dems don't deserve to help fix the bill.

You are a still defending our leaders. You need to quit worrying about both sides of the coin. Neither side gives a damn about you.

I'm not defending anyone. I'm just trying to keep the record straight and correct those who would substitute political rhetoric for the truth.

Just heard Schumer on the radio. What a jerk! If Democrats like him were more reasonable and logical with less lies, they could win some elections.

originally posted by: Trumpamania

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Trumpamania
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What legislation could Trump just magically push through that would fix ObamaCare? It's a cluster to the nth magnitude.

This is a loaded question if I ever saw it. There is no existing legislation to fix Obamacare, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be written or anything. Believe it or not, traditionally, the government worked to fix flawed but well meaning laws not scrap them and try to write their own version when the political sides flipped.

So in a nutshell you have no f'ing idea. Why don't the Dems write a fix? They are the ones that broke it and then told us how great it was going to be.

No #. I'm not a lawyer or a politician. I don't write bills for a living. There is no way I could give you an adequate replacement for Obamacare. As for the Dems, who knows? Maybe they are, but it's not like the Republicans are going to listen to their suggestions or anything even if they did.

You are right "traditionally, the government worked to fix flawed but well meaning laws" but this one wasn't well meaning. It was a way for the government to take over 1/6th of the freaking economy and to control one of the very few things people actually need. What a nice way to make the subjects behave. As the Supreme Court decided, it is a FREAKING TAX!

God forbid if the government create the Affordable Food Act we will all be freaking starving to death.

Yeah yeah. I've heard this # before. That doesn't mean it wasn't well meaning. What's wrong with trying to increase health care access to more people in the country? The final result may have been flawed, but the intentions were definitely good. You are lying if you say otherwise.

Senate Republican health bill: Pay more, get less
LINK

The bottom line is the GOP is trying to hoodwink people. Accepting that coverage will go up astronomically and lying about it. At least Rand Paul is telling the truth that its a lie that policy prices will go down.

This will be an historic disaster and horror. The way they treat human beings.

The Senate bill would hike health care bills in several ways. It would provide less government assistance to pay for premiums and out-of-pocket costs. It would tie subsidies to health insurance policies with higher deductibles. And it would allow insurers to shift more of the financial responsibility to policyholders in states that opt to waive certain Obamacare protections. "There's no way the Senate bill can reduce consumers' net health insurance costs," said Robert Laszewski, a health care consultant. "When the government pays less, people have to pay more."

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The only problem is that there were roughly 30 million uninsured before the ACA and now there are roughly 30 million uninsured now and a bunch more under insured.

It was a tax. A redistribution of wealth from the working class to the sit on your a$$ class. The only way that it made it/could have made it through the Supreme Court is if it were written as a tax. The Congress has no right in the Constitution to force us to buy a private product unless it is a tax.

a reply to: Trumpamania

Yes. Those number look awful in a vacuum, but here is the real skinny of things. Rates may be rising, but they are rising at a MUCH slower pace than before Obamacare. The bill may not have insured as many as was originally projected, but more people ARE insured under Obamacare than before it.

Things aren't perfect yet, but they are better than they were before Obamacare and they damn well are better than if we let the Republicans pass this #ty bill.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: butcherguy

I think most people understand that Obamacare has serious problems and want to see it fixed or replaced by something better. I also believe that the majority of people don't particularly care who does it as long as it's done and done right.

What McConnell just tried to pull doesn't make much sense in this light. Everyone would be better off if they focused on fixing the fundamental shortcomings and delivering something that is marked improvement instead of trying to jam something through by an arbitrary date.

On this I think we agree 100%, this is too complex and too important to be subject to arbitrary political timelines.

Yes, we are in agreement.
In my opinion, McConnell needs to go. Show the old coot to the door.... buh bye.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Wow, you really are warped, you like arguing don't you, I never said the word "deserve ". Your just baiting me. I am done with your circular arguments.

See ya not...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

How are they better than before? You still have 30 million uninsured and the new deductibles make your insurance useless until you are half dead. Maybe rate increases have slowed but my guess is because you get far less now since your deductibles are so high. High deductibles are fine if you can afford it. For years my family would buy catastrophic insurance because we can afford to pay high deductibles. Now you cant even do that or you get fined. So now you just pay more money to the insurance company because you are forced to by the rule of law.

originally posted by: Skorpy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Wow, you really are warped, you like arguing don't you, I never said the word "deserve ". Your just baiting me. I am done with your circular arguments.

See ya not...

now you are suggesting that the Dems don't deserve to help fix the bill.

Reading comprehension. Give it a shot. Or don't. I don't care.

originally posted by: Trumpamania
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How are they better than before? You still have 30 million uninsured and the new deductibles make your insurance useless until your half dead. Maybe rate increases have slowed but my guess is because you get far less now since your deductibles are so high.

Because more people insured is better than them not being insured... Just because more people still need insurance doesn't mean that we haven't seen an improvement under Obamacare. No one is arguing that the ACA is perfect or anything. Also, you get what you pay for; my plan from my work is still pretty great even after the ACA went into effect. At least the bare bones plans actually cover SOMETHING (preventive care). As opposed to plans before that gave you the illusion of coverage but then wouldn't cover anything when you actually got sick or injured.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Trumpamania
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How are they better than before? You still have 30 million uninsured and the new deductibles make your insurance useless until your half dead. Maybe rate increases have slowed but my guess is because you get far less now since your deductibles are so high.

Because more people insured is better than them not being insured... Just because more people still need insurance doesn't mean that we haven't seen an improvement under Obamacare. No one is arguing that the ACA is perfect or anything. Also, you get what you pay for; my plan from my work is still pretty great even after the ACA went into effect. At least the bare bones plans actually cover SOMETHING (preventive care). As opposed to plans before that gave you the illusion of coverage but then wouldn't cover anything when you actually got sick or injured.

That is dumb logic that "more people insured is better than them not being insured." Insurance does not equate to healthcare. If you have insurance and the deductible is so freaking high you cannot afford to go the doctor then you have insurance but still don't have healthcare. That is what is happening to the under insured.

a reply to: Trumpamania

Again. The ACA requires preventative care at a minimum. You may not be able to afford your deductible for catastrophic coverage or you may have to pay out of pocket for quite a few things if you have a bare bones plan, but you ALWAYS have preventative care. That means you can see a doctor yearly for a checkup, gender specific checkups, weight loss counseling, and other means to keep you from getting sick. The appeal is that you can now stay on top of developing illnesses so you spend less time at the doctor's or hospitals on the back end. AGAIN it isn't a perfect system, but it is better than not having insurance at all.

I would LOVE for us to have universal health care or a single payer system, but I'm not going to lie about the current system to obtain that system.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trumpamania

Again. The ACA requires preventative care at a minimum. You may not be able to afford your deductible for catastrophic coverage or you may have to pay out of pocket for quite a few things if you have a bare bones plan, but you ALWAYS have preventative care. That means you can see a doctor yearly for a checkup, gender specific checkups, weight loss counseling, and other means to keep you from getting sick. The appeal is that you can now stay on top of developing illnesses so you spend less time at the doctor's or hospitals on the back end. AGAIN it isn't a perfect system, but it is better than not having insurance at all.

Oh yay!!!!!! A free checkup is useless if you are sick. You need money or insurance that actually pays for something when you are sick. There are tons of people now that don't go to the doctor when they are sick because they can't afford it. They are paying for useless insurance that they are forced to pay (A TAX) and that leaves them without the free spending money to pay for the doctors visit when they are actually sick. Oh but they get free weight loss counseling so that makes up for it.

$10,000/yr for a "free checkup" and some weight loss counseling seems like a great deal.

a reply to: Trumpamania

No #. The point of preventative care is to get on top of things BEFORE they become a problem. Doctor notices your blood pressure is high during your annual checkup? You address it now before it turns into diabetes and a permanent drain on your wallet. Clearly you've never been a mechanic or serviced vehicles in the military before if you don't understand the benefits of preventative maintenance.

And for the #ing third time now. I never said the situation was great, perfect, or even optimal. I'm JUST saying it's a better situation than before.

Hey Krazyman, does this mean anything to you?

(not trying to be rude)


files.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm going to refresh everyone's memory soon to see how people's opinions have changed from then and now. If anything, it adds a little conspiracy twist to this healthcare debacle.

Original thread: Link

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Trumpamania

No #. The point of preventative care is to get on top of things BEFORE they become a problem. Doctor notices your blood pressure is high during your annual checkup? You address it now before it turns into diabetes and a permanent drain on your wallet. Clearly you've never been a mechanic or serviced vehicles in the military before if you don't understand the benefits of preventative maintenance.

And for the #ing third time now. I never said the situation was great, perfect, or even optimal. I'm JUST saying it's a better situation than before.

I am saying it is not better than before, though I am glad you realize ACA is not great or optimal. I do understand the value of preventative maintenance, but you seem to not understand that even with preventative maintenance people get sick. To use your analogy, insurance under the ACA is like having car insurance that pays for oil changes and a yearly engine diagnostic but doesn't pay if you get into a car crash. So now you or your employer pays $10,000 a year for oil changes and a checkup which is a $500 value and you are stuck with the first $6000 of car wreck repairs. Useless!

a reply to: eisegesis

I've heard this conspriacy before but I'm not sold on it totally. For one, why do the Dems keep trying to salvage the bill against the Republican onslaught? If their true goal was along these lines then they should let the Republicans walk off the cliff with this eyesore of a bill then they can push UHC once all the dust settles. Here's the thing, the Dems may be self-serving like any other politician out there but they aren't as heartless as the Republicans tend to be. So their policies tend to have a smoother landing. Thus it doesn't make sense why the Dems would pass a bill with its intention to fail. Because that would be rather inhumane during all the political posturing and collapse of the ACA. Just my opinion though. Who knows what they really think behind closed doors.

a reply to: Trumpamania

Yes. People get sick and this all falls back on to the point that the ACA isn't perfect. It's JUST an improvement. An improvement can be marginal you know?