Interesting Development in Repeal Obamacare Storyline

#2
#2
We are upset that the Senators want to know what they would be replacing Obamacare with before they vote on it? Or at least have some idea of what it is? Sounds like a terrible plan, so much better when you had to vote on it to find out what was inside and even better when they can work out all of the details after its been voted through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3
#3
Nothing should be considered that doesn't allow cross state competition, oversight to eliminate and reduce fraud, prescription drug reform, and reducing costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5
#5
I've read where people actually like the individual aspects of the ACA, it's when it's packaged as "Obamacare" that people largely tend to hate it.
 
#8
#8
Septic said:
I've read where people actually like the individual aspects of the ACA, it's when it's packaged as "Obamacare" that people largely tend to hate it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, "...keeping the good parts."

It seems GOP fanboys understand we need more competition* in health care, but they don't seem to understand why banning denials for previous conditions makes costs skyrocket..."the good parts".

*they want competition in HC but not in manufacturing...go figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#9
#9
n_huffhines said:
Yeah, "...keeping the good parts."

It seems GOP fanboys understand we need more competition* in health care, but they don't seem to understand why banning denials for previous conditions makes costs skyrocket..."the good parts".

*they want competition in HC but not in manufacturing...go figure.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are butthurt over the fact they are discussing doing this in a measured and metered approach rather than just blowing it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#10
#10
hog88 said:
Sounds like you are butthurt over the fact they are discussing doing this in a measured and metered approach rather than just blowing it up.
Click to expand...

I'm not. I am not sure how I feel about it. What makes you think that I am butthurt?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
hog88 said:
Sounds like you are butthurt over the fact they are discussing doing this in a measured and metered approach rather than just blowing it up.
Click to expand...

Yes, the congress and especially trump are known for being measured.

Gtfo nerd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#18
#18
luthervol said:
The highest growth rates in both national debt and health care expenditures in the last 36 years happened under Reagan and Bush 2. The national debt tripled during Reagan's administration. It went up about 80% under Obama. It doubled under Bush 2 and went up only about 25% under Clinton. Similar story on health care expenditures.
Click to expand...
Well the real onerous parts of Obolacare have been pushed back until the asshat is out of office, so there's that.

"If you like your doctor..."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
luthervol said:
The highest growth rates in both national debt and health care expenditures in the last 36 years happened under Reagan and Bush 2. The national debt tripled during Reagan's administration. It went up about 80% under Obama. It doubled under Bush 2 and went up only about 25% under Clinton. Similar story on health care expenditures.
Click to expand...

Saying the national debt tripled under Reagan in comparison to it going up 80% under Obama is pretty deceiving...Reagan added $1.86T and Obama added $7.92T. I would argue that Obama's spending is way more irresponsible considering debt is a problem right now and it wasn't really in the 80s.

I am not a fan of Reagan and I torch him for his fake fiscal responsibility all the time, but he's not even close to as bad as Obama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Orangedogsrule, bamawriter and 2 others
#20
#20
n_huffhines said:
Saying the national debt tripled under Reagan in comparison to it going up 80% under Obama is pretty deceiving...Reagan added $1.86T and Obama added $7.92T. I would argue that Obama's spending is way more irresponsible considering debt is a problem right now and it wasn't really in the 80s.

I am not a fan of Reagan and I torch him for his fake fiscal responsibility all the time, but he's not even close to as bad as Obama.
Click to expand...

Debt was a problem under Reagan, a much bigger problem when he left. The debt under Clinton only rose 25%. Bush 2 100%. The debt Obama inherited was due primarily to Reagan and Bush, and he was more fiscally responsible than either.
 
#21
#21
luthervol said:
Debt was a problem under Reagan, a much bigger problem when he left. The debt under Clinton only rose 25%. Bush 2 100%. The debt Obama inherited was due primarily to Reagan and Bush, and he was more fiscally responsible than either.
Click to expand...

Is that why he collectively spent more than all of his predecessors? Ten trillion genius and not a damn thing to show for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, SpaceCoastVol and AirVol
#22
#22
luthervol said:
Debt was a problem under Reagan, a much bigger problem when he left.
Click to expand...

How was it a much bigger problem if we had a better debt to income ratio back then?

saupload_a_us_debt_burden_1791_2010.png


The debt under Clinton only rose 25%. Bush 2 100%. The debt Obama inherited was due primarily to Reagan and Bush, and he was more fiscally responsible than either.
Click to expand...

I have no problem giving Clinton partial credit, because he could have easily increased the debt more, but part of the reason it only rose 25% is he was the beneficiary of the booming 90s (so more tax revenue) and a lot of the significant spending cuts were cold war related. To his credit, a lot of Reagan's spending did not go toward permanent programs.

Clinton was probably the most fiscally responsible one out of all of them, but Obama and Bush 2 are easily the worst in that regard.
 
#23
#23
n_huffhines said:
How was it a much bigger problem if we had a better debt to income ratio back then?

saupload_a_us_debt_burden_1791_2010.png




I have no problem giving Clinton partial credit, because he could have easily increased the debt more, but part of the reason it only rose 25% is he was the beneficiary of the booming 90s (so more tax revenue) and a lot of the significant spending cuts were cold war related. To his credit, a lot of Reagan's spending did not go toward permanent programs.

Clinton was probably the most fiscally responsible one out of all of them, but Obama and Bush 2 are easily the worst in that regard.
Click to expand...

And he was held in check by a GOP congress led by Newt..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
n_huffhines said:
Republicans and Democrats are already swapping positions on fiscal responsibility | Rare
Click to expand...

Further confirms my belief there will be no movement towards a balanced budget and reducing the debt. Neither party cares because they're viewpoint seems to be since it's not causing problems now, it's not really a problem. They will continue to spend until some crisis happens that threatens everyone. Then and only then will they attempt to address it and it will be more bandaids if anything is even possible at that point.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top