Trump signs order to eliminate ACA insurance rules, undermine marketplaces

a reply to: Wayfarer

The thing is, I don't care about anyone paying for my anything. I don't need someone to help me pay. What I need is Uncle Sam to get his hands out of my pockets. If you think ACA is fairly weighted by income, then you are missing the fact that economies within America vary. A housekeepers wage in NYC would be right in the middle of middle class pay in West Texas (based on housekeeping wages at a Best Western hotel in Queens that I am familiar with, with housekeepers that don't speak English, only Russian).

The wage scale varies greatly from region to region, as does the cost of living. So how in the seven hells did Uncle Sam manage to weight something fairly based on income when there is so much variance in median income depending on locality?

a reply to: Kali74

It's more like paying Netflix to access movies but people that don't have a job get Netflix for free along with people that aren't supposed to be here. So Netflix has to raise its prices for the people that actually pay them for their service.

From what I've read on forums for the past decade, the ACA was going to fail simply because every side has dug in and won't budge... doctors won't reduce their costs or prices; insurance companies aren't going to lower their deductibles or premiums; the very poor can't afford health insurance anyway; the middle and working classes are getting fed of having a deductible that is larger than their annual health expenditure. They are also fed up of government workers, unions and Representatives getting to keep their health care plans while everyone else suffers. It takes the piss that they either have to pay extra in income taxes or pay for insurances. Simply having the choice to get or not get health insurance is what many were wanting. Insurance companiesnow have the choice of lowering their premiums with the chance of getting more people, rather than the all-or-nothing option now at present.

a reply to: stormcell

You're right. It was designed to fail, which is why Obama didn't fix anything. Hillary was to convert ObamaCare into a Universal Government Run system.

BTW..Whoever wrote that news article cited O.P. is the same type of person that helped Trump win...A misinformed hysterical journalist. (aka "idiot")

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Because we all live in the society together. If one person does poorly it behooves us to help them out. The more that succeed and do well the better off we are as a nation. It is why our founding fathers founded the country in the first place. Up until WWII Socialism was an accepted aspect of all American politics. You questioning now is what doesn't make sense. Why should you help others? Because it is the right thing to do.

originally posted by: bender151

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

Well if you read the article, it goes into it, but I know you won't so I'll resummarize here. The problem is that adding plans that aren't ACA compliant will send healthy people to them because they are cheaper. This causes a death spiral in the ACA plans as only sick people are left in that pool. So prices increase drastically. Then, ultimately, we are in the same situation we were in from 2000 - 2009. With health insurance prices rising exponentially from year to year and covering less and less health issues.

Um, healthy people above the defined poverty levels aren't applying anyway. So, these imagine people are going to run to another plan?

This is a lie. More people have health insurance now than before the ACA.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Because we all live in the society together. If one person does poorly it behooves us to help them out. The more that succeed and do well the better off we are as a nation. It is why our founding fathers founded the country in the first place. Up until WWII Socialism was an accepted aspect of all American politics. You questioning now is what doesn't make sense. Why should you help others? Because it is the right thing to do.

Extorted charity is kind of like compulsory patriotism.

The thing about helping others is doing so shouldn't mean you go without the things you need to live. That my family now goes without things to fund an insurance companies profits that are federally mandated in no way looks like "charity" or "helping". It looks like "profits". No matter how much lipstick is put on that pig.

Your problem here is you are trying to argue things that don't need to be argued. I won't dispute that its the right thing to do to help people who cannot help themselves. I would, however, argue that the governments role in doing this isn't to rob peter to pay paul. The governments role is to balance the equation by improving the value of the dollar, improving employment prospects, etc. The federal governments job gets ignored (look at our crappy currency, and our terrible job market) and instead they decide to start reaching in my pocket to cover up for it.

And when I complain, it is insinuated that I am greedy? Really man...WTF?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Don't my taxes already go to Medicaid, Medicare and social security?

originally posted by: Kali74
Health care is never going to be fixed unless we either heavily regulate or eliminate private insurance. It is absolute insanity that we allow any business to operate the way insurance companies do. You pay a ridiculous amount of money every month for access, then you pay a ridiculous amount of money every time you do access, then they penalize you if your access was of a serious nature, they penalize you if you don't access it enough or if you access it too much.

It's insanity to allow this.

It's like paying for Netflix then paying full price for every movie you want to watch.

I agree that the health insurance market exacerbates the situation immensely... The problem is that the insurance sector of the economy represents a significant chunk of the economy. We can't just do away with health insurance without reabsorbing all those lost jobs into different industries in the economy lest we risk massively sinking it.

At least someone is actually trying to flush the turd known as the ACA. Trump is doing everything he can to hold his promise to repeal the ACA which is a hell of a lot more than Boehner ever did, or the rest of congress for that matter. They know it's fubar, but don't give a damn because they don't have to deal with the marketplace like the common peasants they lord over do.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: bender151

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

Well if you read the article, it goes into it, but I know you won't so I'll resummarize here. The problem is that adding plans that aren't ACA compliant will send healthy people to them because they are cheaper. This causes a death spiral in the ACA plans as only sick people are left in that pool. So prices increase drastically. Then, ultimately, we are in the same situation we were in from 2000 - 2009. With health insurance prices rising exponentially from year to year and covering less and less health issues.

Um, healthy people above the defined poverty levels aren't applying anyway. So, these imagine people are going to run to another plan?

This is a lie. Health insurance rolls are at a high.

Yea, because Obama made it a law to have it and penalizes anyone that doesn't with a hefty fine. Yet, allowed himself to be exempt from his own law. Imagine that.

originally posted by: network dude
So offering more choices is a bad thing? care to elaborate on that a bit?

I have a choice to buy a Ferrari or a lambo, doesn't mean I have the money to do it....but, I have CHOICES!!....this is now officially TRUMPCARE.....

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Woohoo! Best news I've heard all day!

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Extorted charity is kind of like compulsory patriotism.

Is it? Americans didn't use to view it that way a century ago.

These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.
 —Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837

Everyone now is more or less a Socialist. 
—Charles Dana, managing editor of the New York Tribune, and Lincoln’s assistant secretary of war, 1848

source

The thing about helping others is doing so shouldn't mean you go without the things you need to live. That my family now goes without things to fund an insurance companies profits that are federally mandated in no way looks like "charity" or "helping". It looks like "profits". No matter how much lipstick is put on that pig.

Well here's the thing. I agree that the ACA shouldn't be the solution. I would rather have universal health care myself. The ACA is the conservative compromise to what I wanted. However, it IS better than the system we had before. I'd rather have it than nothing.

Your problem here is you are trying to argue things that don't need to be argued. I won't dispute that its the right thing to do to help people who cannot help themselves. I would, however, argue that the governments role in doing this isn't to rob peter to pay paul. The governments role is to balance the equation by improving the value of the dollar, improving employment prospects, etc. The federal governments job gets ignored (look at our crappy currency, and our terrible job market) and instead they decide to start reaching in my pocket to cover up for it.

The government's role is to improve and protect the lives of its citizens while being limited by the Constitution.

And when I complain, it is insinuated that I am greedy? Really man...WTF?

I did no so such thing. I am merely saying that helping others is the right thing to do. Paying taxes is also mandatory and outlined in the Constitution as something the government is allowed to collect. You can look at it like robbery, but that is silly. Every government in all of history has taxed its citizens. Social programs are proven to improve the overall welfare of the citizenry. We got to be number 1 in the world by being helpful, not being hording our gains. I really have trouble understanding conservatives' aversion to Social programs.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Kali74
Health care is never going to be fixed unless we either heavily regulate or eliminate private insurance. It is absolute insanity that we allow any business to operate the way insurance companies do. You pay a ridiculous amount of money every month for access, then you pay a ridiculous amount of money every time you do access, then they penalize you if your access was of a serious nature, they penalize you if you don't access it enough or if you access it too much.

It's insanity to allow this.

It's like paying for Netflix then paying full price for every movie you want to watch.

I agree that the health insurance market exacerbates the situation immensely... The problem is that the insurance sector of the economy represents a significant chunk of the economy. We can't just do away with health insurance without reabsorbing all those lost jobs into different industries in the economy lest we risk massively sinking it.

Personal question so not expecting you to answer if you don't want, but do you work in the healthcare industry?

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

You can be salty about the particulars of the law all you want, but its still the law. You cannot argue with that.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

I work for a mid sized pharmaceutical manufacturing company in its IT department. Though. Don't worry. I have huge issues with the pharmaceutical industry too. I'm not beholden to my current industry or anything. I used to be in banking too. Had to get out when the economy crashed though. My conscious wouldn't let me live with myself anymore.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You stated in your previous post an ounce of prevention could have saved a huge load of cost later. I assumed the implication was you couldn't afford the preventative measures, and are now left with a lower likelihood of survival because of it. Are you actually saying you are happy with that situation?

I don't know you, but I believe you shouldn't have your life cut short because you cant afford the treatment necessary to give you the best chance of success. Are you telling me you think its right and true that you perhaps die because you can't afford medical care?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Middleoftheroad

You can be salty about the particulars of the law all you want, but its still the law. You cannot argue with that.

Oh yea I forgot only liberals are allowed to disagree with the law.

a reply to: jimmyx

Or you could have to choose between a Kia and a Hyundai but pay a Maserati payment like Obamacare