- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: American Health Care Act (Obamacare Replacement) introduced
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Iosh has it right- trump is bascially a right wing european on fiscal issues. Supportive of big(ger) government but only for the citizens.
This seems right. I mean by his own admission he loved government power as a developer- eminent domain, tax breaks for buddies all that stuff.
0
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:33 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It is simply apparent you haven't a clue as to why
Simple ideas that are diametrically opposed. Better service for less money....more subsidies with tax cuts. Pre-existing conditions without a mandate.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:38 pm to 5thTiger
Does Trumpcare have a cap. Like one that could affect cancer patients or others with huge treatment bills?
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:45 pm to FanInLA
quote:I think they repealed a prohibition on one.
Does Trumpcare have a cap. Like one that could affect cancer patients or others with huge treatment bills?
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:48 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
The Senate won't pass a version that includes removing the Medicaid expansion.
Yes they will. The GOP senators will have their dog and pony show, tack on a few amendments and then pass it.
quote:
You want to strip the taxes, but keep the things that cost money? Aren't you guys supposed to be concerned about the budget? Or are we back to the unfunded mandates of the GWB years already?
Going back to the unfunded mandates of the GWB years would be an improvement because that would mean we would have gotten rid of the unfunded mandates that Obama piled on top of GWB's unfunded mandates.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:52 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
21 months and you still don't know what a cuck is
Oh man how did I miss this melt.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:53 pm to montanagator
quote:
The problem is that there isn't an existing bill that gets both the moderate Republicans and the HFC.
That is what a conference committee is for.
quote:
A split which mirrors Democratic problems during the passage of the ACA.
No the dems never worked out a bill in conference committee. They scrambled to pass the senate's version of the ACA after Scott Brown got elected to Ted Kennedy's seat.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:54 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Won't happen.
It will happen. Better start getting ready.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 9:57 pm to DyeHardDylan
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:04 pm to DyeHardDylan
I don't know what people expected. A different set of folks who think if they pass the "right" rules they will "fix" this stuff.
Nothing to get worked up over, it wasn't like you should have expected they'd learn yet.
Nothing to get worked up over, it wasn't like you should have expected they'd learn yet.
This post was edited on 3/6/17 at 10:04 pm
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:05 pm to MontyFranklyn
Why can't they just go back to what was in affect before Obamacare minus eliminating the preexisting condition issue?
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:08 pm to AlbertMeansWell
quote:
If Trump fricks this up, he has ZERO chance at re-election.
It would be his version of Bush's "no new taxes" debacle.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:13 pm to Iosh
quote:
This kinda sounds like an endorsement to me
As the great Winston Churchill said "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps the end of the beginning."
Posted on 3/6/17 at 10:18 pm to JabarkusRussell
quote:
Why can't they just go back to what was in affect before Obamacare minus eliminating the preexisting condition issue?
Because government rarely gives up all the ground it gains.
That's why we're supposed to be ever vigilant in what powers we give it or allow it to have.
This post was edited on 3/6/17 at 10:19 pm
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:17 pm to JabarkusRussell
I don't see how he can sign this bill after saying he wouldn't touch Medicaid.
The Medicaid rollback has to die to get the Senate to pass it, although Paul, Cruz and Lee have said they won't vote for a anything other than 'clean repeal', Paul wrote an op ed for fox news today citing a 2015 repeal bill as a model - that bill is about 10 lines long, it's as if the ACA never existed type deal.
The miss two months and get charged 30% rule has to die too. That's just not good for anybody. Its about the equivalent of forcing a tardy kid to walk an extra half mile to school every day to teach them a lesson. Except the tardy kid then makes everyone else late. Death spiral.
But if the snap analysis is correct the real kicker is this: poor, w/c over 55s get fricked, millennials on the coast win.
It'll be a war of forces on prices, with no individual mandate, costs should go up, people will game insurance. However it may be constructed to dissuade the sickest, slowing price rises.
That's the analysis I got from the Twitters. From my own, uninformed and incomplete, reading of the bill, it looks like autism coverage is gone for small group plans. Subsidies will be whittled away to nothing over time.
The Medicaid rollback has to die to get the Senate to pass it, although Paul, Cruz and Lee have said they won't vote for a anything other than 'clean repeal', Paul wrote an op ed for fox news today citing a 2015 repeal bill as a model - that bill is about 10 lines long, it's as if the ACA never existed type deal.
The miss two months and get charged 30% rule has to die too. That's just not good for anybody. Its about the equivalent of forcing a tardy kid to walk an extra half mile to school every day to teach them a lesson. Except the tardy kid then makes everyone else late. Death spiral.
But if the snap analysis is correct the real kicker is this: poor, w/c over 55s get fricked, millennials on the coast win.
It'll be a war of forces on prices, with no individual mandate, costs should go up, people will game insurance. However it may be constructed to dissuade the sickest, slowing price rises.
That's the analysis I got from the Twitters. From my own, uninformed and incomplete, reading of the bill, it looks like autism coverage is gone for small group plans. Subsidies will be whittled away to nothing over time.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:26 pm to JabarkusRussell
quote:
Why can't they just go back to what was in affect before Obamacare minus eliminating the preexisting condition issue?
Because then you need an individual mandate. Or you deregulate any cap on prices based on sickness and have access for all that not all can afford. Or high risk death pools, which failed before and nobody likes, which means taking the sickest out of the insurance market altogether - They were actually the backbone of Ryan's last plan.
They seem to have taken a mix of removing the mandate and premium punishment for being with a 130% rule. The mandate will be gone, but you better fricking buy insurance in case you get ill. Also get fired after 11/1 of any given year or buy expensive cobra to avoid a 30% premium hike. Fun.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:29 pm to Mephistopheles
Build a wall around hospitals and make everyone who lost coverage for two months pay for it.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:30 pm to Mephistopheles
Sigh.... this plan does nothing to address the underlying problem of insurance tied to employment.
The fact of the matter is that the pre-existing condition issue would be much less of an issue if your insurance wasn't tied to your job. Most people who could not get insurance because of their conditions had been laid off and/or quit sometime in the past, which started it all.
We have got to start taxing companies provision of health insurance.
The fact of the matter is that the pre-existing condition issue would be much less of an issue if your insurance wasn't tied to your job. Most people who could not get insurance because of their conditions had been laid off and/or quit sometime in the past, which started it all.
We have got to start taxing companies provision of health insurance.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:31 pm to Mephistopheles
quote:
The mandate will be gone, but you better fricking buy insurance in case you get ill.
Sounds dope. No more freeloaders just buying insurance when they need it, counter to the whole point of insurance.
Posted on 3/6/17 at 11:35 pm to Lou Pai
It's gambling in reverse. I bought from the exchange the past few years. Not fun. Hmm, "maybe I won't need ER much this year, an extra ER deductible might be ok".
But blah, no ones saying year round insurance market.
Sounds like you'd prefer a high risk pool approach? Because right now I can tell you I know tons of people who hit their out of pocket max by mid January. They pay the same you do if you were their age, sex and location.
But blah, no ones saying year round insurance market.
Sounds like you'd prefer a high risk pool approach? Because right now I can tell you I know tons of people who hit their out of pocket max by mid January. They pay the same you do if you were their age, sex and location.
Page 8 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News