• 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!

How important is it to have a replacement for Obamacare prior to repeal?

How important is it to have a replacement for Obamacare prior to repeal?

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
Greenbeard said:
It's going to be the classiest, most luxurious health system you've ever seen, believe me.
Click to expand...

There will be a new definition of the "gold" plan.
 
Mycroft said:
Believe me, whatever the Republicans come up with you can be assured it won't be the usual, bloated, anti-choice, big-government kind of thing that the Democrats are famous for.
Click to expand...

Yeah OK. I can't wait!:roll:
 
radcen said:
You mean like Homeland Security?
Click to expand...

That wasn't TOO bad until Obama got HIS hands on it. You know...that thing the Democrats do.
 
They can't repeal it without a replacement plan. And they need to leave some of the more widely accepted pieces of it in place until they have a better plan.
 
radcen said:
How important is it to have a replacement for Obamacare prior to repeal?

Should the repeal of Obamacare be delayed until we see what the new program would be? Or, should we proceed full-speed ahead?
Click to expand...

If they intend to repeal it then yes a replacement plan is necessary. amending it to remove the bad parts.. which is a lot.. is probably the better way to go.
 
Dittohead not! said:
We've already had a long time to come up with something better.
Click to expand...

shrug...

It could be that Congress WILL pass legislation at the same time or near the time they ****can Obamacare. Doesn't matter to me. All I want, at this point, is Obamacare flushed...entirely flushed.
 
Henrin said:
So your empathy somehow obligates me to pay for their healthcare?
Click to expand...

You were paying for the healthcare of others, to the tune of $116B per year, since before you ever heard of Obama. The typical family had an extra $1000 per year baked into their insurance premium to cover the uninsured...

Before Obamacare, the National Health Insurance Plan

and the federal government kicks in another $70B.....

Key Facts about the Uninsured Population | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
Uncompensated Care for the Uninsured in 2013: A Detailed Examination | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

just because you make Obamacare go away does not mean costs go away. In fact, the implementation of Obamacare saved the federal government money has having people insured and seeing doctors has less of a cost impact than when they don't do preventatives and just hit the healthcare system when they really have a problem. Cutting Obamacare is actually a budget buster.

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2011/01/cbo-repeal-obamacare-would-be-budget-buster
 
SocialD said:
If they intend to repeal it then yes a replacement plan is necessary. amending it to remove the bad parts.. which is a lot.. is probably the better way to go.
Click to expand...

Amending Obamacare..."remove the bad parts"...won't work because so much of it is bad and ALL of it is dependent upon the rest of it. That route would be worse than keeping the crap. No...complete repeal of all 2000+ pages is the only way to deal with it.

As far as a replacement plan being necessary...not necessarily. We COULD dump Obamacare and enact legislation...smart legislation...at a later date. We COULD enact temporary legislation to bridge the gap. It is quite doable to dump Obamacare without accompanying legislation to replace Obamacare.

Please don't get caught up in the Democratic narrative that got us Obamacare in the first place...that we need some massive government "stuff" to "fix" health care. We don't.
 
radcen said:
How important is it to have a replacement for Obamacare prior to repeal?

Should the repeal of Obamacare be delayed until we see what the new program would be? Or, should we proceed full-speed ahead?
Click to expand...

Critically important unless you want to f over millions of people. It wont be repealed anyway. Revamped? yes, amended? yes? reconfigured in ways? yes but not repealed because that would be absolutely retarded and would makes things worse than they were.
 
Mycroft said:
Amending Obamacare..."remove the bad parts"...won't work because so much of it is bad and ALL of it is dependent upon the rest of it. That route would be worse than keeping the crap. No...complete repeal of all 2000+ pages is the only way to deal with it.

As far as a replacement plan being necessary...not necessarily. We COULD dump Obamacare and enact legislation...smart legislation...at a later date. We COULD enact temporary legislation to bridge the gap. It is quite doable to dump Obamacare without accompanying legislation to replace Obamacare.

Please don't get caught up in the Democratic narrative that got us Obamacare in the first place...that we need some massive government "stuff" to "fix" health care. We don't.
Click to expand...

Temporary legislation I'm wary of though... every time they do a temporary measure that's supposed to be fixed later they never get to it.
 
SocialD said:
Temporary legislation I'm wary of though... every time they do a temporary measure that's supposed to be fixed later they never get to it.
Click to expand...

Yes, that can always be a problem, but if that happens that's when leadership is important...both Congressional and Executive. Plus, the "we'll fix it later" thing usually happens from Democrats. Such as, give us a tax hike now and we'll cut spending later...and later never comes. That's happened more than once in my memory.
 
upsideguy said:
You were paying for the healthcare of others, to the tune of $116B per year, since before you ever heard of Obama. The typical family had an extra $1000 per year baked into their insurance premium to cover the uninsured...
Click to expand...

I think he's one of those guys who absolutely despises the idea of Obamacare, but would be OK with something more like the ACA...:wink2:
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

It could be that Congress WILL pass legislation at the same time or near the time they ****can Obamacare. Doesn't matter to me. All I want, at this point, is Obamacare flushed...entirely flushed.
Click to expand...

So, put the cap back on benefits,
Don't tax the uninsured,
Kick the kids off their parents' policy at 18,
No requirement to insure pre existing conditions,
No requirement to provide insurance to employees

and nothing to replace those provisions.

and the result of that is going to be, what again?
 
radcen said:
I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

If it is repealed, with no replacement, and these people lose their insurance, wouldn't they just go back to what they had before? Which is nothing.

In some cases that would suck, in some cases they'd save a buttload of money.
Click to expand...

Except those that would end up with nothing would be those who need it the most.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, put the cap back on benefits,
Don't tax the uninsured,
Kick the kids off their parents' policy at 18,
No requirement to insure pre existing conditions,
No requirement to provide insurance to employees

and nothing to replace those provisions.

and the result of that is going to be, what again?
Click to expand...

Regardless the hyperbole, nobody was dying in the streets before Obamacare.
 
Mycroft said:
Regardless the hyperbole, nobody was dying in the streets before Obamacare.
Click to expand...
People aren't dying in the streets in Canada and European countries that have "single payer", either, despite all the talk of long waits and denied care.
 
radcen said:
People aren't dying in the streets in Canada and European countries that have "single payer", either, despite all the talk of long waits and denied care.
Click to expand...

Good for them, but that doesn't mean that system is good for the US.
 
Mycroft said:
Regardless the hyperbole, nobody was dying in the streets before Obamacare.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I said anything about people dying in the streets. I said:

put the cap back on benefits,
Don't tax the uninsured,
Kick the kids off their parents' policy at 18,
No requirement to insure pre existing conditions,
No requirement to provide insurance to employees
Click to expand...

which is what repealing Obamacare really means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom