• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Obamacare is so bad....

I think what people are missing is this battle is all about the 40 million people who did not have health insurance for one reason or another, prior to Obamacare.

There are better ways to fix that than completely dismantling the existing system, and building a new federal system. Don't kid yourself. Full - on socialized, unionized medicine was the ultimate long term, goal, and the Democrats were willing use false promises to screw the 320 million who were just fine to get there.

It's the Republicans fault for not doing anything about it when they had he numbers that led to Obamacare in the first place. So here we are, trying to construct a form of Obamacare that works.

There are only three payers: the patient/family, the employer, or the government,

What numbers did they have? Not one Republican voted for it, and several Dem senators had to be bribed to vote for it. No one even knew what Obamacare was, but the leftwingnuts today think it's the best thing in the Universe because a big D president wanted it. That's all they know. They know the name Obamacare. They lie about the skyrocketing costs, and omit all the lies about cost savings that Obama promises not to mention keep your doctor/keep your plan. It's also sick the way they think the world will end if it's repealed. It's nothing more than a tax law according to Justice Roberts; and it doesn't work. It's a total piece of **** from top to bottom.

Anyway, both Ryan and Trump want a replacement to pass the same day as the repeal; so Dems just need to STFU about that.
 
Repeal-and-delay acknowledges two facts:

1. Obamacare is better than no Obamacare
2. The GOP has no functional alternative to Obamacare

So it stays on the books.
Yeah, let's hide the fact that the obamacare website that's a PoS costing taxpayer $2B. Oh, it's soooooooooooo wonderful. :roll:
 
What numbers did they have? Not one Republican voted for it, and several Dem senators had to be bribed to vote for it. No one even knew what Obamacare was, but the leftwingnuts today think it's the best thing in the Universe because a big D president wanted it. That's all they know. They know the name Obamacare. They lie about the skyrocketing costs, and omit all the lies about cost savings that Obama promises not to mention keep your doctor/keep your plan. It's also sick the way they think the world will end if it's repealed. It's nothing more than a tax law according to Justice Roberts; and it doesn't work. It's a total piece of **** from top to bottom.

Anyway, both Ryan and Trump want a replacement to pass the same day as the repeal; so Dems just need to STFU about that.

They are just repeating "the big lie", but you can only get away with that when you don't Google "Republican plans to replace Obamacare"... D'oh!
 
1. Still are
Premiums did not grow as fast for several years after the ACA was passed and started taking effect.


2. still do
Incorrect. ACA has guaranteed issue, so they can't refuse to cover people with pre-existing conditions, and can't refuse to cover something because they were pre-existing.


3. So? Millions weren't on Medicaid before..
...yes, and that was not a good thing, because those people had no health insurance at all.


4. So? How many voters you think were affected by lifetime limits
20,000 per year.


5. they don't cover preventative care now.
Incorrect. ACA explicitly requires insurers to cover preventive care, for adults and kids. E.g.

https://www.healthcare.gov/preventive-care-adults/
https://www.healthcare.gov/preventive-care-children/


6. Yes... I bought insurance on my own prior to the ACA. No big deal
So did I. It was an expensive PITA. I wound up with crappy coverage at a high cost, and my insurer repeatedly tried not to cover conditions. I'm one of the lucky ones, in that I was able to get it at all. As a freelancer, not getting coverage would have been a major issue.

Again, insurers were turning down 20% of applicants -- and growing -- by 2010.


The truth is... that republicans could repeal Obamacare without having ANYTHING in place and it would not be a big deal politically. there probably would be rather little fallout.
Fantasyland is over there ----->

A straight-up repeal would kill coverage for over 20 million Americans. AFAIK 2.6 million people signed up after the election. Medicare's costs would jump by $800 billion. Guaranteed issue, gone. The industry would be in a furore, because they know that going back to pre-ACA would be a disaster. Ryan is already backing down from Repeal & Delay, and says the goal now is to do Repeal & Replace "concurrently."
 
You're right about people not understanding being sick and not being able to get any healthcare at all.
People do indeed have a hard time wrapping their heads around the idea of dying because they can't afford healthcare in the wealthiest society in the world. Is that really a surprise to you?

If you don't understand their plight, then you are a sociopath.

You're the expert. Does every post in this forum have to have an personal insult? What do people think is gained by it?
 
I was dropped by my insurance in 2016.

Er uh lime, the trick to posting lying anecdotal stories to push the conservative agenda is to not make it obvious you lied. Insurance can only drop you for non payment or fraud. Geez, 6 years into Obamacare and 3 years into the exchanges and you guys still have to lie to criticize Obamacare. what does it say about you and conservatism when you think its okay to lie?
 
You're the expert. Does every post in this forum have to have an personal insult? What do people think is gained by it?

Sorry. I've been the recipient of a lot of personal insult today on this board... and I glossed over the fact that you weren't one of the perps.
You are right. Let me rephrase:

It seems indicative of sociopathy when someone refuses to understand why people would not be willing to accept the withdrawal of their sole affordable healthcare option.

Better?
 
You jump from position to position being aggressive. That is boring.
You make numerous assertions, without presenting any evidence or proof to back up your claims. That is not worthy of a full response. Thanks for not playing.
 
You make numerous assertions, without presenting any evidence or proof to back up your claims. That is not worthy of a full response. Thanks for not playing.

Which was that?
 
You're the expert. Does every post in this forum have to have an personal insult? What do people think is gained by it?

well maybe he thinks conservatives deflect and post falsehoods intentionally. Case in point, look at this post.

The right plan is no Obamacare at all and no involvement of government in the insurance business. Unfortunately, people aren't ready to understand that.

The Obamacare is not in the insurance “business.” Just like the guys who think Obamacare “dismantled healthcare insurance” or the guy who think this thread is about fixing Obamacare, you’re simply not responding to the thread in an honest and intelligent fashion.

Now what does that say about Obamacare after 6 years you and yours still cannot criticize Obamacare with reality? That tells me Obamacare is working. “repeal and delay” tells me that too. Unfortunately, conservatives aren’t ready to accept that.
 
They are just repeating "the big lie", but you can only get away with that when you don't Google "Republican plans to replace Obamacare"... D'oh!

er uh chuck, I googled "Republican plans to replace Obamacare." here's the blurbs I found in the first few searches

"That Republicans have failed to offer a single, comprehensive replacement bill forObamacare has become a running joke in Washington over the last several years:"

"The repeal and replace of Obamacare, in other words, was—and is—the party's top domestic policy priority. Yet the GOP's current plan to repeal and replace the law would do neither."

"Part of the problem is that Republicans have never been able to agree on a replacement plan, despite railing against Obamacare for nearly .."


Hey, the nutbag right wing site "the federalist" makes it near the top of the search, surely they’ll tell you what you want to hear.

"After all, it’s been nearly a week since the new congressional session started, and Republicans still haven’t produced a comprehensive plan to replace a massive federal health-care law. "

Ouch. Don’t worry, they "assure" you they have plans later in the editorial. How comforting. anyhoo, did you figure out yet that the thread is about the fact that republicans still don't have a plan to replace Obamacare? Hey I know, maybe you should google "Republican plans to replace Obamacare."
 
What numbers did they have? Not one Republican voted for it, and several Dem senators had to be bribed to vote for it. No one even knew what Obamacare was, but the leftwingnuts today think it's the best thing in the Universe because a big D president wanted it. That's all they know. They know the name Obamacare. They lie about the skyrocketing costs, and omit all the lies about cost savings that Obama promises not to mention keep your doctor/keep your plan. It's also sick the way they think the world will end if it's repealed. It's nothing more than a tax law according to Justice Roberts; and it doesn't work. It's a total piece of **** from top to bottom.

Anyway, both Ryan and Trump want a replacement to pass the same day as the repeal; so Dems just need to STFU about that.

American, thank you for your pointless and obedient rant. But this thread is not about the false conservative narratives you cling to. Its about the fact that after 6 years, republicans have no plan. Surely even you have to start to wonder about their integrity. yea, probably not. anyhoo, I’m glad you get a warm fuzzy that Ryan and Trump want a replacement plan to pass the same day but it ignores the fact that they don’t have a plan. American, if you want to have an honest and intelligent discussion, start your next obedient rant with

“sure its been 6 years since Obamacare passed and we’ve had 3 full years of exchanges but it's okay that republicans still don’t have a plan because…”

thanks in advance
 
The Obamacare is not in the insurance “business.”

Sadly it is in the insurance business. It manages how the insurance industry works. It defines what kind of policies a company can offer and makes it illegal for it to offer any others. It operates the only authorized retail channel for individual policies. And obviously all of that was a mistake.
 
Government was involved in healthcare to the detriment of healthcare.
Assertion is not a proof.


If you get government out of it, you will find costs go down and services improve, just like any service being provided.
Oh? So which nations have fully private health care, and have lower costs than the US?

Do you plan to tell America that we should cancel Medicare, Medicaid and VA health care?


The following was from an interview with Milton Friedman in 2006. It's spot on.
Friedman was a very intelligent economist, who made many brilliant observations.

That quote was not one of them.

Most of those advancements in medicine? They were funded by governments, which performed much of the basic research.

Was penicillin developed by a pharmaceutical? How about the polio vaccine? Which private company eradicated polio and smallpox? (None; that type of extensive effort requires government intervention.) How many pharmaceuticals would spend massive sums on drug trials, if they weren't required to do so? Was Merck making an all-out effort to discover the structure of AIDS? You do know that big pharma is reluctant to make vaccines, because they're too cheap? Or that they don't want to put the money into next-gen antibiotics, despite the major impending threat of drug-resistant bacteria.

I.e. many of those "miracles" were a result of government involvement.

Meanwhile, a fully private system -- particularly without insurance, as he's suggesting -- absolutely will not work, and will not drive down costs. Patients don't have enough time to shop around, and often are stuck with few treatment options. It's rarely a good idea to select a treatment option based on price rather than effectiveness. The costs are simply too great for most people to bear on their own, and when they are sick. While it is easy to chide human beings for not saving up $50,000 for that first heart attack, the reality is that won't work. We need to distribute the risk.

And of course, since no government or society is actually insane enough to run a completely private and unregulated health care system, his position has the benefit of never being tested in the real world.

Friedman was living in a libertarian fantasy world. Citing him is not your best move.
 
Sorry. I've been the recipient of a lot of personal insult today on this board... and I glossed over the fact that you weren't one of the perps.
You are right. Let me rephrase:

It seems indicative of sociopathy when someone refuses to understand why people would not be willing to accept the withdrawal of their sole affordable healthcare option.

Better?

No. Just different words to call me a sociopath. The government provided premium subsidies for some citizens. There is no reason it can't do so with a private system. The government should make good on its promises. It should continue to subsidize those policies for those who have them now and continue to qualify for them. The rest of Obamacare can disappear to the benefit of everyone, including those with subsidies. I think talking about taking health insurance away from people is a red herring.
 
No. Just different words to call me a sociopath. The government provided premium subsidies for some citizens. There is no reason it can't do so with a private system. The government should make good on its promises. It should continue to subsidize those policies for those who have them now and continue to qualify for them. The rest of Obamacare can disappear to the benefit of everyone, including those with subsidies. I think talking about taking health insurance away from people is a red herring.

Probably because it would have no effect on you.
 
er uh chuck, I googled "Republican plans to replace Obamacare." here's the blurbs I found in the first few searches

"That Republicans have failed to offer a single, comprehensive replacement bill forObamacare has become a running joke in Washington over the last several years:"

"The repeal and replace of Obamacare, in other words, was—and is—the party's top domestic policy priority. Yet the GOP's current plan to repeal and replace the law would do neither."

"Part of the problem is that Republicans have never been able to agree on a replacement plan, despite railing against Obamacare for nearly .."


Hey, the nutbag right wing site "the federalist" makes it near the top of the search, surely they’ll tell you what you want to hear.

"After all, it’s been nearly a week since the new congressional session started, and Republicans still haven’t produced a comprehensive plan to replace a massive federal health-care law. "

Ouch. Don’t worry, they "assure" you they have plans later in the editorial. How comforting. anyhoo, did you figure out yet that the thread is about the fact that republicans still don't have a plan to replace Obamacare? Hey I know, maybe you should google "Republican plans to replace Obamacare."

Your problem is you are using Google. You should NEVER use google if you want unbiased search results. I did the same search with Bing and got this:

GOP Has Plan To Replace Obamacare ... - thefederalist.com
House Republicans Unveil Plan to Replace Obamacare
Republicans agree on ObamaCare repeal – the replacement is ...
GOP plan to replace Obamacare gives big tax break to the ...
GOP resistance grows to Obamacare repeal without ...
Republicans have a plan to replace Obamacare, and its ...

(some of these links go to places that are against the GOP...but they all seem to agree that the GOP have some kind of plan)

That's just the first 6 hits...there's more.
 
Your problem is you are using Google. You should NEVER use google if you want unbiased search results. I did the same search with Bing and got this:

GOP Has Plan To Replace Obamacare ... - thefederalist.com
House Republicans Unveil Plan to Replace Obamacare
Republicans agree on ObamaCare repeal – the replacement is ...
GOP plan to replace Obamacare gives big tax break to the ...
GOP resistance grows to Obamacare repeal without ...
Republicans have a plan to replace Obamacare, and its ...

(some of these links go to places that are against the GOP...but they all seem to agree that the GOP have some kind of plan)

That's just the first 6 hits...there's more.

He's not interested in finding out what is going on. "What do those headlights coming our way mean?", he asks.
 
Your problem is you are using Google. You should NEVER use google if you want unbiased search results. I did the same search with Bing and got this:
Google does tweak its search results based on the user. Bing does the same thing, though.

That said, it's pretty obvious the Republicans don't have a plan. That's why they have been trying to push "Repeal and Delay," to buy time to set up a plan. But they aren't even willing to put a timetable on things, let alone describe the plan. That's why the Freedom Caucus is pushing back against a reconciliation vote to defund the ACA.

What's happened is that the Republicans keep putting forth vague plans that don't actually provide any help. They usually recommend allowing insurance sales across state lines, HSAs, and offering high-risk pools.

However, that is pretty much spitting in the wind. The ACA already allows insurers to sell across state lines, as long as the state in question signs off on it. Many states already have HSAs, and they kinda suck; they certainly aren't a replacement for subsidies or exchanges or regulated plans. High-risk pools also don't work, and aren't a replacement for guaranteed issue.

So basically, at the moment they have nothing which offers:
• Guaranteed issue
• Guaranteed coverage for preventative medicine and screenings
• Medicare savings of hundreds of billions of dollars per year
• Incentivizes better care of Medicaid patients
• Exchanges
• Subsidized insurance for people who can't afford it
• Medicare expansion
• Closure of the Medicare Part D "Donut Hole"
• Allows approval of generic biologics
• The end of lifetime care limits
• Ratepayer rebates when an insurer spends too much on administration
• Rate review (insurers must notify groups if rates go up more than 10%)

And that's not all. The ACA is freaking huge. Most people have no idea what they're objecting to (or supporting).
 
Well Vern, I was indeed dropped by my previous plan and I'm not the only one. Friends I've talked to who were also with Blue Cross had their plans dropped as well.

How do you explain the drastic in increase in premiums when Obama said families were going to save about 25%?

Did you ever look up Saul Alinsky's 8 rules?
 
Google does tweak its search results based on the user. Bing does the same thing, though.

That said, it's pretty obvious the Republicans don't have a plan. That's why they have been trying to push "Repeal and Delay," to buy time to set up a plan. But they aren't even willing to put a timetable on things, let alone describe the plan. That's why the Freedom Caucus is pushing back against a reconciliation vote to defund the ACA.

What's happened is that the Republicans keep putting forth vague plans that don't actually provide any help. They usually recommend allowing insurance sales across state lines, HSAs, and offering high-risk pools.

However, that is pretty much spitting in the wind. The ACA already allows insurers to sell across state lines, as long as the state in question signs off on it. Many states already have HSAs, and they kinda suck; they certainly aren't a replacement for subsidies or exchanges or regulated plans. High-risk pools also don't work, and aren't a replacement for guaranteed issue.

So basically, at the moment they have nothing which offers:
• Guaranteed issue
• Guaranteed coverage for preventative medicine and screenings
• Medicare savings of hundreds of billions of dollars per year
• Incentivizes better care of Medicaid patients
• Exchanges
• Subsidized insurance for people who can't afford it
• Medicare expansion
• Closure of the Medicare Part D "Donut Hole"
• Allows approval of generic biologics
• The end of lifetime care limits
• Ratepayer rebates when an insurer spends too much on administration
• Rate review (insurers must notify groups if rates go up more than 10%)

And that's not all. The ACA is freaking huge. Most people have no idea what they're objecting to (or supporting).

That's the problem...it's freaking huge. It's TOO huge. It tries to do everything and it does nothing well. In the meantime, it removes choices from just about everyone involved in health care from the providers to the payers to the consumers.

We don't need huge. We need effective.
 
That's the problem...it's freaking huge. It's TOO huge. It tries to do everything and it does nothing well.
It's legislation. Not a Swiss Army knife.

Be specific about what doesn't work. How did it screw up:
• Guaranteed issue
• Guaranteed coverage for preventative medicine and screenings
• Medicare savings of hundreds of billions of dollars per year
• Medicare incentives
• Exchanges (note: after the initial problems, they work very well now)
• Subsidized insurance for people who can't afford it
• The Medicare expansion
• The closure of the Medicare Part D "Donut Hole"
• Allowing approval of generic biologics
• The end of lifetime care limits
• Ratepayer rebates when an insurer spends too much on administration
• Rate review (insurers must notify groups if rates go up more than 10%)


In the meantime, it removes choices from just about everyone involved in health care from the providers to the payers to the consumers.
...Yes, removing choices is part of how it works. It prevents insurers from screwing over customers. It prevents freeloaders from mooching off the system. It prevents hospitals from kicking out Medicare patients before their issues are addressed.

I realize we live in a society where 20 types of milk and 200 types of cereal is seen as "good." But if the consequences of certain choices are bad for both the individual and the society as a whole, then there are good reasons to regulate those choices.


We don't need huge. We need effective.
Dude. Health care affects every single citizen, every city, every state. If you're going to improve the efficiency and quality of care, then yes, you have to do "huge."
 
It's legislation. Not a Swiss Army knife.

Be specific about what doesn't work. How did it screw up:
• Guaranteed issue
• Guaranteed coverage for preventative medicine and screenings
• Medicare savings of hundreds of billions of dollars per year
• Medicare incentives
• Exchanges (note: after the initial problems, they work very well now)
• Subsidized insurance for people who can't afford it
• The Medicare expansion
• The closure of the Medicare Part D "Donut Hole"
• Allowing approval of generic biologics
• The end of lifetime care limits
• Ratepayer rebates when an insurer spends too much on administration
• Rate review (insurers must notify groups if rates go up more than 10%)



...Yes, removing choices is part of how it works. It prevents insurers from screwing over customers. It prevents freeloaders from mooching off the system. It prevents hospitals from kicking out Medicare patients before their issues are addressed.

I realize we live in a society where 20 types of milk and 200 types of cereal is seen as "good." But if the consequences of certain choices are bad for both the individual and the society as a whole, then there are good reasons to regulate those choices.



Dude. Health care affects every single citizen, every city, every state. If you're going to improve the efficiency and quality of care, then yes, you have to do "huge."

Government mandated one size fits all satisfies nobody. That's why Obamacare is destined for the toilet.
 
Your problem is you are using Google. You should NEVER use google if you want unbiased search results. I did the same search with Bing and got this:

GOP Has Plan To Replace Obamacare ... - thefederalist.com
House Republicans Unveil Plan to Replace Obamacare
Republicans agree on ObamaCare repeal – the replacement is ...
GOP plan to replace Obamacare gives big tax break to the ...
GOP resistance grows to Obamacare repeal without ...
Republicans have a plan to replace Obamacare, and its ...

(some of these links go to places that are against the GOP...but they all seem to agree that the GOP have some kind of plan)

That's just the first 6 hits...there's more.
He's not interested in finding out what is going on. "What do those headlights coming our way mean?", he asks.

well first, let me congratulate Chuckie on finally figuring out what the thread is about. Anyhoo, I posted exactly what I found. And I posted the blurbs. Lets settle this once and for all. Post the republican plan and explain why the "repeal and delay" nonsense is being bandied about. thanks in advance.
 
Back
Top Bottom