Pro-Trump states most affected by his health care decision

Glen Contrarian said:

Really? Then why is it that the very, very red Deep South is the poorest part of the nation? If you'll check, generally speaking, residents of blue states have higher incomes, longer life expectancies, lower violent crime rates, lower homicide rates (yep! NYC has a lower homicide rate than the state of Louisiana. Chicago is an outlier), higher levels of education...

...yeah, life is generally better in blue states. And yes, I do know firsthand what it's like to grow up in a very red state.

But you know what? Red states aren't poor because of conservative governance. Red states are red because they are generally poor and less well-educated. Improve their education and raise their living standards, and they will turn blue.

Click to expand...

I enjoy Flying over the Red States at 35,000 ..That is the best way to experience them

Conservative said:

Your problem is you believe throwing money at the problem is always the solution, doesn't matter how dependent one gets, how much is wasted, how much the taxpayers have to fund, or how many problems are never solved simply by throwing cash at the problem. the radical left doesn't pay any attention to results including the election results.

The most prosperous country in the world doesn't need a 4.3 trillion dollar federal govt for every dollar of that comes out of the pocket of taxpayers and is less money to solve state and local issues.

Click to expand...

The belief that strengthening America is a waste of money will be the death of us. It is also why we have fallen behind in areas where we used to rule. Luckily election results are only temporary and you could be soon looking very differently at them. The charade has come to a head with Trump and the tide will turn as more and more people realize what liars the right wing are. How long do you think you can keep people voting against their own interests and blind to what coddling the wealthy has done to this country? We are not machines meant to slave endlessly to enrich the few, we are the many who made this country and want to share more equally in the wealth we have created. It will happen you can bet on it.

Conservative said:

Wow 6% of the total, pocket change right? Didn't stop Texans from going. Just like a liberal throw money to bureaucrats

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Do you even know what the CBO classified as the 6%? Probably not. But I noticed that you didn't refute the conservative lie about voting against it because of pork. Conservative legislators in Texas voted against it because those folks care nothing about anyone but Texans... and then whined for help when THEIR state got hit with a hurricane. Had nothing to do with "pork" which didn't exist. Bunch of hypocrites, all of them. Fortunately, there are many good citizens in the state of Texas who don't act similar to their scumbag legislators.

Conservative said:

No, we will never be done until you post the data that Obama had which was better than bush? You see actual results matter and although Bush lost the Congress and Republicans lost the White House in 2008 McCain was the candidate and people bought the Obama rhetoric and ignored the Obama resume something you did as well and you continue to ignore the Obama results

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

And in 2016 people bough the Trump rhetoric and ignored the Trump resume. You just can't escape the conservative hypocrisy, can you?

Vern said:

ooooo Ali, "generous with other people's money" sounds like a conservative narrative more than a cogent argument. I'm not generous with other people's money. I want what's best for America. Case in point with Obamacare, I'm happy that 20 million now how healthcare. But I'm also happy that everybody gets a lower deficit and higher quality care. And double bonus, thanks to Obamacare health care inflation is at its lowest point in decades and 2014 had the highest number of business startups in 20 years. So unlike people on the right mindlessly spouting narratives I'm supporting a policy that made America better. Its no coincidence that the economy grows more and the deficit goes down more when democrats are in power. They do what's best for America.

Click to expand...

Go team politics, rah, rah. The ends justify the means, even if the ends may not be met. Why bother spending time to get the state to do what one wants when they can convince themselves that the Federal Government should do it and force everyone else to go along.

Should I just swallow your narrative, or perhaps you could provide some facts to back up each of your claims--there are a few whoppers you have served up there.

Finally, could you please describe how you understand the difference between healthcare and health insurance?

Conservative said:

LOL, adding to that tax takes more money out of the pockets of people who earned it so you can feel good about the govt. claim that they are helping people, helping people to do what, become more dependent?

Click to expand...

As I've said several times before. The whole idea of government dependence is a made-up fallacy.

The idea that subjecting people to starvation and homelessness creates an incentive to work is just an excuse for selfishness. Throughout most of human history the poor were left to starve and die in the streets and it didn't provide them the incentive to lift themselves out of poverty. Yet, conservatives contend the poor are worse off with government help.

This meme is thrust upon Americans to swallow which happens to serve the interests of the wealthy conservatives that benefit from those policies. Modern conservatism uses the smoke-screen of self-reliance, individualism and character to mask policies which are self-serving, bigoted and cruel. The cadre of conservative billionaires don't want to pay higher taxes that will be used to help "those people." Thus, they invent a myth that the best way to help the poor is to NOT provide them any help at all. This way, according to them, their misery will give the poor the incentive to become educated and industrious. As I said earlier, this has never worked in all of human history.

Their objective is to keep taxes on the rich low and keep government out of their hair. But these people's numbers are small, so they need to fund propaganda groups like the Heritage Foundation to create false data and spread the message to middle-class conservatives, who are generally stupid enough to swallow their lies. Thus the pro-life conservative-leaning worker who listens to Rush Limbaugh will repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety, less likely to protect his job, and less likely to benefit him economically.

iguanaman said:

The belief that strengthening America is a waste of money will be the death of us. It is also why we have fallen behind in areas where we used to rule. Luckily election results are only temporary and you could be soon looking very differently at them. The charade has come to a head with Trump and the tide will turn as more and more people realize what liars the right wing are. How long do you think you can keep people voting against their own interests and blind to what coddling the wealthy has done to this country? We are not machines meant to slave endlessly to enrich the few, we are the many who made this country and want to share more equally in the wealth we have created. It will happen you can bet on it.

Click to expand...

How does Obanacare strengthen America? As the negative response to Trumps ending of the illegal subsidies to it indicates, its built upon a lie. As a concrete matter, it demonstrates its a very flawed law, thats causing all sorts of problems.
There is nothing compassionate about that.

Conservative said:

Interesting I guess those degenerate also gave Republicans control of the house the Congress and State houses all over the country as well?

Click to expand...

Yes, those morons exist everywhere.

I guess the only ones that aren't degenerate are the minorities that don't understand data and results and by the radical left-wing rhetoric

Click to expand...

These are the same degenerates that gave us Trump. Not one of them can cite a single action by Trump and the specific result that action had much the same way you can never do it either no matter haw many times you were asked.

It is amazing how far into fantasyland the left is willing to go to protect something their shining boy did, despite how awful it is. The original premise of the thread is false. The payments the EO ended were subsidies to the insurance companies, not to the individuals to defray the cost of premiums. Yesterday there was no one on the left wanting to subsidize businesses and today they do. They also forgot that the EO has provisions that should reduce the cost of insurance to individuals. Assuming those individuals will buy insurance, there is no need for corporate subsidies. The elimination of the corporate welfare is positive. The other provisions of the EO are more positive.

Having said that I will also say that the government has proven that it is incompetent in managing the health insurance industry. Hasn't anybody realized that yet? And yet you don't want to get the government out of the way. You want even more of it. Will common sense ever overtake partisanship?

Athanasius68 said:

How does Obanacare strengthen America? As the negative response to Trumps ending of the illegal subsidies to it indicates, its built upon a lie. As a concrete matter, it demonstrates its a very flawed law, thats causing all sorts of problems.
There is nothing compassionate about that.

Click to expand...

The ACA has allowed those with pre-conditions who could not afford the insurance to actually get the care they need. Had the Republicans not spent over 8 years trying to repeal it instead of actually supporting the idea it would not have destablalized the markets as bad as it has. The rates sky rocketed because the insurance companies kept reacting to possible repeals.

fmw said:

It is amazing how far into fantasyland the left is willing to go to protect something their shining boy did, despite how awful it is. The original premise of the thread is false. The payments the EO ended were subsidies to the insurance companies, not to the individuals to defray the cost of premiums. Yesterday there was no one on the left wanting to subsidize businesses and today they do. They also forgot that the EO has provisions that should reduce the cost of insurance to individuals. Assuming those individuals will buy insurance, there is no need for corporate subsidies. The elimination of the corporate welfare is positive. The other provisions of the EO are more positive.

Having said that I will also say that the government has proven that it is incompetent in managing the health insurance industry. Hasn't anybody realized that yet? And yet you don't want to get the government out of the way. You want even more of it. Will common sense ever overtake partisanship?

Click to expand...

Rates were sky rocketing even before the ACA so the private sector has proven they cannot manage health insurance well. We had those with pre-existing conditions unable to even get insured or insured at a reasonable rate for them and lifetime or yearly caps so people would have to forgo ANY care whatsoever. That is the insurance you want to go back to. **** those with pre-existing conditions right? We have money for wars but not our own citizens? That's pretty ****ed up right there.

Praxas said:

Rates were sky rocketing even before the ACA so the private sector has proven they cannot manage health insurance well. We had those with pre-existing conditions unable to even get insured or insured at a reasonable rate for them and lifetime or yearly caps so people would have to forgo ANY care whatsoever. That is the insurance you want to go back to. **** those with pre-existing conditions right? We have money for wars but not our own citizens? That's pretty ****ed up right there.

Click to expand...

It isn't the insurance companies that are out of control. It is the health industry in general that has no ability or incentive to reduce costs. Pre-existing conditions are a matter of cost. That is reflected in what the insurance companies do. I do agree that we could do a lot less policing of the world. The world would be worse if we stopped but so be it.

Praxas said:

The ACA has allowed those with pre-conditions who could not afford the insurance to actually get the care they need. Had the Republicans not spent over 8 years trying to repeal it instead of actually supporting the idea it would not have destablalized the markets as bad as it has. The rates sky rocketed because the insurance companies kept reacting to possible repeals.

Click to expand...

The GOP has done nothing to destabilize ACA. It is functioning as designed.

fmw said:

It isn't the insurance companies that are out of control. It is the health industry in general that has no ability or incentive to reduce costs. Pre-existing conditions are a matter of cost. That is reflected in what the insurance companies do. I do agree that we could do a lot less policing of the world. The world would be worse if we stopped but so be it.

Click to expand...

Of course pre-existing conditions are a matter of cost, but that is a matter we should be helping our citizens with. I tire of those saying we have no money when we send aid to other countries, start and maintain wars, continue funneling money to make the military bigger and bigger and continue to act like we are rulers of the world all the while ignoring homelessness, health care and providing for our veterans in our own country. Those areas I listed are the ones I agree need to be America First.

Athanasius68 said:

The GOP has done nothing to destabilize ACA. It is functioning as designed.

Click to expand...

Of course it does. When you tell someone that you are going to repeal something that directly would affect your income you start to plan for that by increasing your costs so you can pad yourself for change.

Praxas said:

Of course pre-existing conditions are a matter of cost, but that is a matter we should be helping our citizens with. I tire of those saying we have no money when we send aid to other countries, start and maintain wars, continue funneling money to make the military bigger and bigger and continue to act like we are rulers of the world all the while ignoring homelessness, health care and providing for our veterans in our own country. Those areas I listed are the ones I agree need to be America First.

Click to expand...

I would agree with you if we had a competent government, but we don't.

fmw said:

I would agree with you if we had a competent government, but we don't.

Click to expand...

So in the meantime we should just throw those with pre-existing conditions, homeless, and veterans under the bus? I would rather at least DO something about it than go back to the status quo of doing nothing as what will happen if the ACA is repealed.

Praxas said:

So in the meantime we should just throw those with pre-existing conditions, homeless, and veterans under the bus? I would rather at least DO something about it than go back to the status quo of doing nothing as what will happen if the ACA is repealed.

Click to expand...

But what you want to do is worse than going back in my view.

fmw said:

But what you want to do is worse than going back in my view.

Click to expand...

Sorry not for those with pre-existing conditions or middle aged. Being outright denied or unobtainable insurance due to cost, lifetime and yearly caps on care and age discrimination where costs also inhibit care.

We as a nation should put forth the health of our citizens. Unhealthy citizens are only a burden on ERs and government.

Greenbeard said:

The "pay-fors" for the new spending expected under the original ACA were based on a combination of new revenues and savings in existing programs.

As it turned out, the spending has been significantly lower than budgeted for (see: "Future Obamacare Costs Keep Falling" (2015) or "CBO: Obamacare Costing The Feds A Third Less Than Expected" (2017)). Meanwhile most of the new revenues still kicked in.

At the same time, the savings, in the former of slower Medicare cost growth, have been larger than expected (and budgeted for in the ACA cost projections).

Given that, we could make the system more generous and still fall within the financial envelop of the original ACA projections back in 2010.

Click to expand...

Then why were were told that in many/most states, premiums were going up up to 25% this year?

Praxas said:

Sorry not for those with pre-existing conditions or middle aged. Being outright denied or unobtainable insurance due to cost, lifetime and yearly caps on care and age discrimination where costs also inhibit care.

We as a nation should put forth the health of our citizens. Unhealthy citizens are only a burden on ERs and government.

Click to expand...

You want to screw the majority in favor of the minority. We need to get back to equality. That means treating everyone the same. It doesn't mean taking from one group to give to another.

fmw said:

It is amazing how far into fantasyland the left is willing to go to protect something their shining boy did, despite how awful it is. The original premise of the thread is false. The payments the EO ended were subsidies to the insurance companies, not to the individuals to defray the cost of premiums. Yesterday there was no one on the left wanting to subsidize businesses and today they do. They also forgot that the EO has provisions that should reduce the cost of insurance to individuals. Assuming those individuals will buy insurance, there is no need for corporate subsidies. The elimination of the corporate welfare is positive. The other provisions of the EO are more positive.

Having said that I will also say that the government has proven that it is incompetent in managing the health insurance industry. Hasn't anybody realized that yet? And yet you don't want to get the government out of the way. You want even more of it. Will common sense ever overtake partisanship?

Click to expand...

No one has "realized" what is not true and you are complaining? Govt. has proven far more efficient than private insurers at administrating HC. In fact a prime driver of our high HC costs is the for profit private insurers.

fmw said:

You want to screw the majority in favor of the minority. We need to get back to equality. That means treating everyone the same. It doesn't mean taking from one group to give to another.

Click to expand...

We were at equality, where someone who has a pre-existing condition was treated the same as someone who was well. You want to go to inequality where pre-existing conditions were treated differently.

iguanaman said:

No one has "realized" what is not true and you are complaining? Govt. has proven far more efficient than private insurers at administrating HC. In fact a prime driver of our high HC costs is the for profit private insurers.

Click to expand...

Sort of silly comparison. Recipients don't pay for medicaid so that number should be zero. Recipients pay the same for medicare that they did in 2007 so that should be a flat line.

fmw said:

Sort of silly comparison. Recipients don't pay for medicaid so that number should be zero. Recipients pay the same for medicare that they did in 2007 so that should be a flat line.

Click to expand...

You can't even read the chart. It shows total per capita costs not premiums. It also shows that the Govt. is much better at controlling costs than the private sector. I guess that is why you couldn't read it.