Health care bill pulled from floor

[Póg mo 1,749]

4 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Actually I have the same plan with the same level of coverage. Just twice the cost. By the way about 30% of the health care costs for the company I work for were ACA taxes last year which in turn were in part passed on to the employees. I consider myself lucky because my employer did everything they could to keep costs down. Most people I know aren't so lucky and had their costs triple. I don't know anyone personally who has benefited from Obamacare in any way. It is a hand out to the insurance companies and a tax revenue generator and nothing more.

 

 

So you don't really know if Obama care caused the increased for you. News flash, insurance has been increasing in cost for decades now. Employers can't be expected to absorb costs indefinitely, especially considering how stupid flawed company health insurance is. You should ask your company to fire everyone over a certain age, and then I am sure, your Company's insurance costs will come back down. Of course this plan, may not work for you, but at least some people might get cheaper insurance.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

6 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Here's what I think people don't get about the idea of buying insurance ala-carte. It sounds great on the surface right? Why should I pay for stuff I don't use afterall?

 

If you're a man you don't want coverage that pays for female cancers, pre natal care, birth control etc (even though I would argue even if men don't actively plan on becoming 'fathers' some do anyway by 'opsies' and they should have some responsibility for the care of that kid and or preventing the birth of the kid if they want to do things with ladies).

If I'm a woman though do I feel like paying for STDs in men, testicular issues, male hormones, prostate cancer, ED treatments and such?

But if we keep going into this line of thought, there could be a whole host of things in insurance we'll never need, want, or use - for instance you may never have a problem with cancer, your heart, or various other ways to get sick and die, or substance abuse treatments (or conditions developed related to the long term abuse of the body (cancers/disease/liver failure/hepatitis) or psychologists. Where does one draw the line on deciding the things they can and cannot choose to pay to insure? Who gets to decide what's essential and what isn't for the rest of everyone else, and should they? We are all paying for largely ''what ifs'', coverage for things that ''could happen''.

 

Ala carte won't work, as nifty as it sounds because it currently operates in risk pools. No one individual is likely to need many of the services insurance covers pre and post Obamacare, but we are all likely to use it eventually. The healthy pay for the sick. Pre O'care premiums were lower for some - I can attest to that personally. But I had no virtual difference in the high deductible and it did offer less coverage overall. The insurance still pays out barely anything to any doctor I would see - nothing about that changes. And don't get me started on dental... which is a joke. So with O'care I have a skyrocketing premium for the two of us, and a still high deductible. These things alone are still just as prohibitive for a person seeking care as it was before. Doctors are still not getting paid fairly, the quality in some hospitals are going down even as they are making tons of money, insurance companies complain it's not their fault they have to raise the price but they are loving the monopoly they have. Its been pretty well studied, but ala carte doesn't drive down costs either. The company is going to make their money, one way or the other.

 

I once though that single payer would always be off the table in America. But I don't believe we can keep going as we have doing the same old tired things. Let me tell you though, there are problems with the NHS in the UK. Big ones. We'd have to figure out how to address those problems that could crop up if we tried something similar. 

Are you saying that , one way or another, Trump will be the X factor that makes socialized medicine in the US come true?

[OriZ 3,157]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

 

I once though that single payer would always be off the table in America. But I don't believe we can keep going as we have doing the same old tired things. Let me tell you though, there are problems with the NHS in the UK. Big ones. We'd have to figure out how to address those problems that could crop up if we tried something similar.

Or the ones I pointed out on a number of occasions in regards to the Israeli system. As I said before, I'm not eternally opposed to it being the government's job to take care of our well being medically just as much as keeping us safe, but I'd like to see a plan that comes after studying all the other systems that already exist, and addressing their issues, before I can say if I support it or not.

[OriZ 3,157]

8 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

 

So you don't really know if Obama care caused the increased for you. News flash, insurance has been increasing in cost for decades now. Employers can't be expected to absorb costs indefinitely, especially considering how stupid flawed company health insurance is. You should ask your company to fire everyone over a certain age, and then I am sure, your Company's insurance costs will come back down. Of course this plan, may not work for you, but at least some people might get cheaper insurance.

Something for everyone to ponder, no matter which side you're on:

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=d85t

[yuna628 9,676]

2 minutes ago, ccneat said:

Are you saying that , one way or another, Trump will be the X factor that makes socialized medicine in the US come true?

If he can convince his followers of it, sure. He's convinced them of a lot of silly non-existing things. Imagine if he actually convinced them of some real helpful ideas and actually did them! It's always amusing though, republicans constantly want to repeal, they say it's why they ran on it, and made up empty repeal bills for months... and then when it comes down to it they are too scared to put up or shut up. Because they know the consequences of their actions, it's just a big game. There's an overall mood shift in America - the people that O'care did actually help (and it did seriously help some people) happen to be their very own constituents. The people that it harmed, are also angry sure - and yet they don't want certain things taken away from them that O'care gave them. People need to decide in this country what they really want. The ''but it's socialist!'' single payer excuse isn't going to cut it forever.

[theresaL 408]

51 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

a la carte health insurance is nonsense. 

 

everybody say it with me now..SINGLE PAYER

 

http://digital.vpr.net/post/bernie-sanders-introduce-single-payer-health-care-bill-us-senate#stream/0

 

 

If Trump's name is on it the Dems would still vote against it.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, theresaL said:

If Trump's name is on it the Dems would still vote against it.

if trump's name is on it perhaps he should invest some actual time and work into the project. not trump's mo, i know..

this isn't about trump, nothing is actually.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

3 minutes ago, theresaL said:

If Trump's name is on it the Dems would still vote against it.

As they well should. Don't get mad, get even. How many Repuclicans voted fo the Affordable Care Act? 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

I'm not surprised th bill was pulled. After months of mouthing off about repealing the ACA, Trump thinks he solved it in 3 weeks work? Please. I give his administration an F on this. He should be ashamed of himself. 

[TBoneTX 45,289]

Sixteen more off-topic posts have been removed.

Administrative action, some of it severe, has been taken against several members.

Don't ignore in-thread warnings.

[theresaL 408]

1 hour ago, spookyturtle said:

As they well should. Don't get mad, get even. How many Repuclicans voted fo the Affordable Care Act? 

We all know the answer to that, but what is generally left out is why they didn't vote for it. Many of the same reasons the Freedom Caucus didn't vote for T-Care. Spooky you have actually made my point for  me which is, it's more important for Dems to play partisan politics than to actually represent the American people's interests. Dems would rather march in Nazi style lockstep than work across the isle to benefit the American people.

 

I actually do agree with you about this bill being rushed and not good legislation, but then it's really just O-care light and that is the problem. 

Edited March 27, 2017 by theresaL

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 minute ago, theresaL said:

We all know the answer to that, but what is generally let out is why they didn't vote for it. Many of the same reasons the Freedom Caucus didn't vote for T-Care. Spooky you have actually made my point for  me which is, it's more important for Dems to play partisan politics than to actually represent the American people's interests. Dems would rather march in Nazi style lockstep than work across the isle to benefit the American people.

 

I actually do agree with you about this bill being rushed and not good legislation, but then it's really just O-care light and that is the problem. 

Do you think painting the picture of Dems marching "Nazi style lockstep"  really helps illustrate what you are saying

[theresaL 408]

yes I do.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, theresaL said:

yes I do.

Okay then

[IAMX 3,055]

3 hours ago, Boiler said:

Might help to have something not written by lobbyists. Too many noses in the trough.

It's all positioning now. I honestly wouldn't even trust Republicans not to craft a bill that, like Obamacare, gives this idiotic mandate to the insurance industry and fails to address prices whatsoever.

 

And to other posters suggesting this is Trump.. use your head, people. Trump never really formulated any specific plan about the "replace" part, he just wanted rid of Obamacare. This recent replacement conjured by Ryan and co. (i.e. insurance industry) is effectively Obamacare under a different name. Trump was just jumping on anything Republicans can pass that includes a repeal. Not praise worthy at all, but not really indicative of a Trump fail either. To me this symbolizes, though, the difficulty of both parties, their establishment, and how in the pockets of private interests they are. I'd like to see Ryan and McConnell tossed aside for someone who has the agenda in mind that got Republicans the mandate they have. I'm not a Republican by any means, I'd just like to see the cronyism of both parties given a kick in the ### for once in recent memory, besides the 2016 election.

Edited March 27, 2017 by SRVT