Interesting Development in Repeal Obamacare Storyline

[Orange_Vol1321]

So why the ass kicking after it was passed? And I know this is hard for you to get but most in the GOP are ok with states making decisions. Obamacare was not that.

Allowing to cross state lines would be good for competition and pricing too IMO.

 

[Burger]

Yep my friend. And I don’t post about the demise of Trump bc I was wrong at every turn. But I don’t think his supporters realize how hated he is. I am convinced they hate trump more then they loved Obama. I may be wrong, yet again, but we shall see.

You're definitely not. Trump is either loved or hated. Trump also has a great skill of making his opponent just as unlikable.

 

[C-south]

Yep my friend. And I don’t post about the demise of Trump bc I was wrong at every turn. But I don’t think his supporters realize how hated he is. I am convinced they hate trump more then they loved Obama. I may be wrong, yet again, but we shall see.

Just as many people hated obama if not more so. The difference is they kept acting like adults and being productive citizens.

 

[lawgator1]

Yesterday, in the Pizzagate thread, LG predicted that Trump would float the idea of a pardon to Epstein to keep him from flipping. Something about the lawyers keeping it from going to trial until after the election, and then the pardon. I tell you what. LG is looking more and more like Miss Cleo.

I didn't mean in the next hour and a half.

 

[lawgator1]

So why the ass kicking after it was passed? And I know this is hard for you to get but most in the GOP are ok with states making decisions. Obamacare was not that.

So why didn't they do that in the 2 years they had?

57 votes to repeal. Countless court battles to repeal.

ZERO offer of a replacement.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

Politically it does not. A reminder that the ACA is based on a model by the GOP and adopted by Romney. The only reason the party disavows it now is that it is linked to Obama.

ACA was a scam. We were told it was designed to reduce cost, but costs actually doubled, even worse, deductibles disappeared. It was simply a way to get insurance for people not working paid for by people who are working. A 1st step toward government controlled insurance. The Republicans can't come up with a plan because there is no plan to cover these high costs, highest in the world. Prices became inflated simply because insurance paid the bills. As an example, costs are lower for similar services in China simply because they can't afford more. The only Solution is to reduce prices by force, then any number of plans will work effectively.

 

[lawgator1]

ACA was a scam. We were told it was designed to reduce cost, but costs actually doubled, even worse, deductibles disappeared. It was simply a way to get insurance for people not working paid for by people who are working. A 1st step toward government controlled insurance. The Republicans can't come up with a plan because there is no plan to cover these high costs, highest in the world. Prices became inflated simply because insurance paid the bills. As an example, costs are lower for similar services in China simply because they can't afford more. The only Solution is to reduce prices by force, then any number of plans will work effectively.

Reduce prices by force? What does that mean?

 

[McDad]

So why didn't they do that in the 2 years they had?

57 votes to repeal. Countless court battles to repeal.

ZERO offer of a replacement.

I disagree that e replacement is needed. Why repeal bad policy to replace it with more bad policy.

I do agree repeal should have been joined to why the policy is bad for America and efforts to help the free market reduce costs of care and insurance

 

[Jxn Vol]

Allow the free market to work. The government needs no hand in the insurance business.

A novel idea is for the patient and their doctor to actually sit down and discuss a course of treatment. Once decided utilize a HSA and discuss other ways of payment.

Also in that same vein of thought, allow the patients to shop for insurance coverage from an open market where competition keeps cost driven down.

 

[Roustabout]

This is the time where all republicans will focus on his relationship with Clinton and all democrats will focus on his relationship with Trump.

 

[lawgator1]

Allow the free market to work. The government needs no hand in the insurance business.

A novel idea is for the patient and their doctor to actually sit down and discuss a course of treatment. Once decided utilize a HSA and discuss other ways of payment.

Also in that same vein of thought, allow the patients to shop for insurance coverage from an open market where competition keeps cost driven down.

So kill off protection for preexisting conditions, correct?

Free market principles work poorly with insurance. Most people would not get coverage at all, particularly young people. Then we let them die when they have no coverage? Let the 3 year old die because her parents decided that the extra $100 a month to cover was not worth the small chance she would contract a serious illness?

Too bad, folks, you bought the wrong coverage.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

Reduce prices by force? What does that mean?

Insurance companies limit the amount they will pay for a procedure. Just need to take that up a few notches to a realistic price for services rendered. Doctors simply can't make what they are currently making and have an affordable insurance program to cover it, it's mathematically impossible. If you say quality will drop, I agree, but maybe we can't afford the quality that has been created for us? Adjustments need to be made before insurance can possibly be implemented.

 

[lawgator1]

Insurance companies limit the amount they will pay for a procedure. Just need to take that up a few notches to a realistic price for services rendered. Doctors simply can't make what they are currently making and have an affordable insurance program to cover it, it's mathematically impossible. If you say quality will drop, I agree, but maybe we can't afford the quality that has been created for us? Adjustments need to be made before insurance can possibly be implemented.

Sounds like you are advocating for price controls.

 

[Mick]

You're definitely not. Trump is either loved or hated. Trump also has a great skill of making his opponent just as unlikable.

So Trump's tweets make you dislike anyone he tweets about.

 

[BigOrangeD]

So kill off protection for preexisting conditions, correct?

Free market principles work poorly with insurance. Most people would not get coverage at all, particularly young people. Then we let them die when they have no coverage? Let the 3 year old die because her parents decided that the extra $100 a month to cover was not worth the small chance she would contract a serious illness?

Too bad, folks, you bought the wrong coverage.

I think a compromise could be made. Prices should drop considerably if true open markets were introduced. For those with pre-existing conditions that nobody will touch, then let medicare take it.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

Sounds like you are advocating for price controls.

You either have price controls or you drop insurance all together, these are the only viable choices at this point. No insurance coverage and then charge what people the market will bear would take care of the problem. This is reality as soon as the insurance costs are higher than the population can pay.

 

[MontyPython]

Stay outta the fiction aisle

Facts matter.

60% of Americans Want Obamacare

 

[lawgator1]

I think a compromise could be made. Prices should drop considerably if true open markets were introduced. For those with pre-existing conditions that nobody will touch, then let medicare take it.

LOL, all that does is make Medicare the insurer for the already sick. Taxes for all will pay for it, which is what the right bitcHes about with the ACA or "socialized medicine."

 

[BigOrangeD]

LOL, all that does is make Medicare the insurer for the already sick. Taxes for all will pay for it, which is what the right bitcHes about with the ACA or "socialized medicine."

Well, the government already pays that bill plus the bill for illegals, poor, addicted, etc. No need to pay the whole tab for the entire country. We definitely cannot afford that. Add true free markets and prices will drop.

 

[Velo Vol]

The GOP has been very idiotic on this issue.

Heaven forbid the ACA gets struck down, there is no plan for what to do next. It would be a disaster.

 

[newyorkvol]

Insurance companies limit the amount they will pay for a procedure. Just need to take that up a few notches to a realistic price for services rendered. Doctors simply can't make what they are currently making and have an affordable insurance program to cover it, it's mathematically impossible. If you say quality will drop, I agree, but maybe we can't afford the quality that has been created for us? Adjustments need to be made before insurance can possibly be implemented.

So you want to have the person providing the service make less so the middle man can offer a cheaper product while continuing to profit greatly?

If you’re looking for price controls, how about limiting what shareholders in insurance companies can earn. They, the middle man, cut physician fees and deny patient services in order to maximize profits.

Unless the patient is directly paying the doctor, the middle man will always find a way to benefit. Whether that middle man is private insurance or government, introducing a third party to the physician-patient relationship AUTOMATICALLY drives up the cost or diminishes the quality of healthcare.

I’m not advocating for a pure fee for service model as that is obviously impossible. Just saying that the major player in this game is the insurance company.....not the doctor or patient.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

So you want to have the person providing the service make less so the middle man can offer a cheaper product while continuing to profit greatly?

If you’re looking for price controls, how about limiting what shareholders in insurance companies can earn. They, the middle man, cut physician fees and deny patient services in order to maximize profits.

Unless the patient is directly paying the doctor, the middle man will always find a way to benefit. Whether that middle man is private insurance or government, introducing a third party to the physician-patient relationship AUTOMATICALLY drives up the cost or diminishes the quality of healthcare.

I’m not advocating for a pure fee for service model as that is obviously impossible. Just saying that the major player in this game is the insurance company.....not the doctor or patient.

I would agree both are profiting greatly and I doubt they can sort out who will reduce the cost of what. Someone will need to do that for them. I guarantee you if "medicare for all gets established" that max cost will exist for every procedure.

 

[theFallGuy]

Facts matter.

60% of Americans Want Obamacare

Apparently they were ignored then...

Americans Don't Want Obamacare - NYTimes.com

 

[lawgator1]

Well, the government already pays that bill plus the bill for illegals, poor, addicted, etc. No need to pay the whole tab for the entire country. We definitely cannot afford that. Add true free markets and prices will drop.

Not if you mandate that people in emergent need of care get it. That has to be paid for too.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

So why didn't they do that in the 2 years they had?

57 votes to repeal. Countless court battles to repeal.

ZERO offer of a replacement.

If I remember correctly the GOP has come out and said sorry we didn't do what was promised on that issue.
I'm guessing you want a link to that but it's off the top of my head remembering seeing Mitch at the mic saying this. No political party wants to try and clean up some of the areas of the disaster known as Obama Care. It's too hard for the lawyers that call themselves congressmen & women in figuring stuff like this out and to make it be a pie in the sky happy zone for all those that will be involved for heath care plans.