• 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....

Vern said:
oh and pero, in addition to republicans attacks on insurers and Obamacare customers, don't forget their indirect affect on insurers. Seems the uncertainty concerning the republicans "replacement" is also scaring off insurers. When fewer insurers participate in a market, prices go up.

Obamacare Uncertainty is Scaring Off Health Insurance Companies - NBC News



And what that statement has to ignore is republicans have had 6 years to come up with a plan and they promised one "right out of the gate". Its kinda the point of the thread. If you were look at the facts honestly you would have to conclude that republicans were never serious about replacing Obamacare. What stops republicans from ever (yea, I said ever) coming up with a better plan is any "better" plan will cost more money. You cant get rid of the "pre-existing condition" exclusion without mandates or single payer. Single payer is more expensive. Its why republicans came up the idea of mandates in the first place. Do you think this proves Ryan has been lying and pandering to you the last 7 years? Its what ryan said about their repeal bill from last year.
Click to expand...

These insurance companies had announced their intentions long ago. If me, like I said I would just let it die without lifting a finger. Do I think Ryan or Boehner before him were lying? No. Politics and especially any type of legislation is always a numbers game. It takes 218 votes for repeal in the house, doable since January of 2010. But any repeal bill was tabled by Senator Harry Reid and never brought up in the Senate. So repeal wasn't doable at all until January of 2015. But still in the senate, it wasn't doable then, 60 votes were needed for cloture and the GOP had only 54. Then too as long as Obama was president even if by a million to one shot a repeal passed both the house and the senate, he would veto it requiring 2/3rds of the house and 2/3rds of the senate to over ride the presidential veto.

So until January of 2017, repeal wasn't doable although I think seven times the house passed the repeal from January 2011 through January 2017. The numbers just weren't there. The number still aren't in the senate. 52 isn't 60. Now if the repeal is attached to the budget process, then a simple majority would do or if McConnell uses the Senator Harry Reid nuclear option, then its doable, finally.

But what I would do and this is just me, I would just let it die without doing nothing. But since Republicans are bent on repeal and replace, that I would do things piecemeal. Repeal, change, replace one piece or item at a time over the next few years. I would let Obama keep his name to it.

I am more of a realist, if numbers are there, I don't expect miracles. Congress doesn't govern, the president does. The president governs according to congress's wishes most of the time. That is unless a president uses his pen and his phone bypassing congress. Obama did this and now Trump is doing it more. In my opinion, both were and are wrong.
 
Vern said:
so you did know how many remain uninsured. I suspected you might but for some reason you thought it was an intelligent and honest tactic to pretend not to. thanks to Obamacare 20 million Americans gained coverage and every American enjoys increased quality of care and a lower deficit. Hey just for laughs, instead of continuing rant and flail, tell us what you think will be in the republican replacement plan. If your conservative masters let you that is.
Click to expand...

Of course I knew how many were uninsured but the question is why don't you? why would you tout 20 million added with still 30 million uninsured? Why would you ignore that most of those uninsured became insured under Medicaid NOT ACA? Why are you ignoring the people who lost their doctors, their plan, and had skyrocketing premiums? Why are you claiming improved quality of healthcare when the opposite is true??

As has been pointed out and you ignored which you always do, Obama lost the House in 2010-2012, lost Congress in 2014-2016 and the WH so where is the disconnect Vern??
 
Perotista said:
These insurance companies had announced their intentions long ago.
Click to expand...

You've waved away the uncertainty republicans are causing to your satisfaction. How do you wave away the fact that republicans didn't expand Medicaid it numerous states, encouraged people to not sign up and sabotaged the risk corridors. Oh and see how you ignore republicans have been railing against Obamacare for 7 years and pretend that's its only been since January 2017 that they've needed to come up with a plan. But Pero, according to Paul Ryan, repeal was doable on Day 1. You really don't just get to ignore that and the fact republicans have been railing at Obamacare for 7 years.

And pero, if you were really were a realist you would realize that republicans simply cannot come up with a better and cheaper plan. Its why they kept stalling and delaying about their plan because they don't have one. Mandates are how you get rid of the "pre-existing condition" exclusion without single payer. They supported mandates for 20 years and then stopped when President Obama compromised on them.
 
Conservative said:
became insured under Medicaid NOT ACA
Click to expand...

And that's all the proof one needs to know that you're simply not here to have an honest and intelligent discussion. Your concern for "30 million uninsured" is also flamingly hypocritical as well as dishonest. You know that Obamacare was never going to insure everybody and you know its 20 million more than the republican plan of "status quo". But you also know about 5 million more would be insured if republicans had expanded Medicaid, not encouraged people to not sign up and not sabotaged the risk corridors. So you prove your concern is not for the uninsured and just another conservative "talking point".
 
Vern said:
You've waved away the uncertainty republicans are causing to your satisfaction. How do you wave away the fact that republicans didn't expand Medicaid it numerous states, encouraged people to not sign up and sabotaged the risk corridors. Oh and see how you ignore republicans have been railing against Obamacare for 7 years and pretend that's its only been since January 2017 that they've needed to come up with a plan. But Pero, according to Paul Ryan, repeal was doable on Day 1. You really don't just get to ignore that and the fact republicans have been railing at Obamacare for 7 years.

And pero, if you were really were a realist you would realize that republicans simply cannot come up with a better and cheaper plan. Its why they kept stalling and delaying about their plan because they don't have one. Mandates are how you get rid of the "pre-existing condition" exclusion without single payer. They supported mandates for 20 years and then stopped when President Obama compromised on them.
Click to expand...

Vern, you know as much about Medicaid as you do about ACA totally ignoring where the funding comes from both. You don't realize that expansion of Medicaid was the responsibility of the states since it is the states that have to fund those programs when the federal funding stops and states said NO.

You further do not understand states like TX that have their own healthcare programs for the uninsured that include free state funded clinics and healthcare services. According to people like you we need the Federal Govt. to provide healthcare for 50 sovereign states with different costs of living and that just shows how poorly informed you really are

The Affordable Care Act at Age Five: Quality of Care - PNHP's Official Blog

Findings

To sum up, these supposed “fixes” to improve quality in our market-based system , quite predictably, fail to result in acceptable levels of quality. The U. S. continues to fare poorly in quality, access, efficiency, affordability, and equity of care compared to other advanced countries around the world. The ACA built on a flawed financing system, which will be unsustainable for patients, families and taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know Vern, this is a blog with a lot of great context
 
Vern said:
And that's all the proof one needs to know that you're simply not here to have an honest and intelligent discussion. Your concern for "30 million uninsured" is also flamingly hypocritical as well as dishonest. You know that Obamacare was never going to insure everybody and you know its 20 million more than the republican plan of "status quo". But you also know about 5 million more would be insured if republicans had expanded Medicaid, not encouraged people to not sign up and not sabotaged the risk corridors. So you prove your concern is not for the uninsured and just another conservative "talking point".
Click to expand...

My concern is your biased, partisan posts that ignore actual data and results. ACA has 30 MILLION Americans uninsured and most of those insured were eligible without expansion of Medicaid but you haven't a clue. So apparently you believe it is the responsibility of the Federal Govt. to take people by the hand, lead them to things the Federal Govt. believes will help them, totally ignoring the bureaucracy created and the failure to deliver strong results. You take a victory lap for access and ignore the reality

To sum up, these supposed “fixes” to improve quality in our market-based system , quite predictably, fail to result in acceptable levels of quality. The U. S. continues to fare poorly in quality, access, efficiency, affordability, and equity of care compared to other advanced countries around the world. The ACA built on a flawed financing system, which will be unsustainable for patients, families and taxpayers.
Click to expand...

You also ignore we have 323 million Americans in 50 states all with different cost of livings and tax structures thus what other countries do doesn't mean that can be done here
 
Conservative said:
Yes, I know Vern, this is a blog with a lot of great context
Click to expand...

interesting blog Con, maybe your blog is right.

There is an alternative—single payer national health insurance, improved Medicare for all, coupled with a private delivery system, the principles of which were laid out more than 20 years ago

Lets face it, republicans lied themselves into a corner about "mandates" and I've seen more than one conservative say its time for single payer. I just never thought you'd be one. You continue to surprise me Con.
 
Vern said:
interesting blog Con, maybe you're blog is right.


There is an alternative—single payer national health insurance, improved Medicare for all, coupled with a private delivery system, the principles of which were laid out more than 20 years ago

Lets face it, republicans lied themselves into a corner about "mandates" and I've seen more than one conservative say its time for single payer. I just never thought you'd be one. You continue to surprise me Con.
Click to expand...

yes, except this country isn't like others in that we have 50 different cost of living sovereign states with different sets of problems and delivery systems making a one size fits all single payer system costly, ineffective, and one that will drive more doctors out of the system

The electorate voted in November and rejected Obama. whether or not there is a replacement is insignificant to me because this is about economic growth, jobs, and national security that will lead to individuals being able to handle their own healthcare
 
Conservative said:
yes, except this country isn't like others in that we have 50 different cost of living sovereign states with different sets of problems and delivery systems making a one size fits all single payer system costly, ineffective, and one that will drive more doctors out of the system
Click to expand...

another excellent point for single payer Con because as you know the only other system similar to ours is Switzerland. But at least we agree that Obamacare is better than the republican plan of "status quo". Even you know that Obamacare 20 million people now have gained health insurance. And all Americans benefit from a lower deficit and higher quality care.
 
Vern said:
interesting blog Con, maybe your blog is right.

There is an alternative—single payer national health insurance, improved Medicare for all, coupled with a private delivery system, the principles of which were laid out more than 20 years ago

Lets face it, republicans lied themselves into a corner about "mandates" and I've seen more than one conservative say its time for single payer. I just never thought you'd be one. You continue to surprise me Con.
Click to expand...

Oh, by the way, Vern, you are a big proponent of ACA and yet the public rejected it for what you claim is a commitment to provide a better system. Better than what, Vern, since ACA is a panacea for you and has delivered on its promises according to you. Why would the public reject a program that you believe has done so much good?
 
Vern said:
another excellent point for single payer Con because as you know the only other system similar to ours is Switzerland. But at least we agree that Obamacare is better than the republican plan of "status quo". Even you know that Obamacare 20 million people now have gained health insurance. And all Americans benefit from a lower deficit and higher quality care.
Click to expand...

No we don't, ACA or Obamacare was rejected by the electorate and you cannot explain why? There are 8 million people in Switzerland and you want to compare that to this country? Keep promoting that 20 million number while ignoring the 2016 election results
 
Conservative said:
No we don't, ACA or Obamacare was rejected by the electorate and you cannot explain why?
Click to expand...

I can explain why very easily. You were lied to about Obamacare. Speaking of which, if Obamacare is so bad, how come republicans cant come up with a plan let alone a better one. (its what the thread is about).
 
Perotista said:
Obamacare is dying a very slow death. Each year we read where another insurance company or two has pulled out of the exchanges.
Click to expand...

And every year, millions more people get insurance through Obamacare

Odd that something is dying, yet growing every year
 
Conservative said:
So Vern now you want to expand Medicaid to every state? You really are good at spending someone else's money. Medicaid after the initial expenditure the cost goes to the taxpayers of the individual states

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Umm, Medicaid has been in every state since long before Obama became President.

And the Feds cover 90% of the costs of Medicaids expansion
 
sangha said:
Umm, Medicaid has been in every state since long before Obama became President.

And the Feds cover 90% of the costs of Medicaids expansion
Click to expand...

For what period of time and then what? By the way when the Feds pay for anything where does it come from? You like paying Medicaid expansion in the state of Arizona or any other state outside of NY?
 
Vern said:
Why can’t republicans come up with a better plan? How about a plan? Yea, they’ve had 6 years. We’ve had 3 full years of the exchanges. Certainly there is enough data from that alone to help come up with a plan. it doesn't even have to be a better plan. They can just lie that its better and their base wont hold them accountable. Their base just needs something to repeat over and over. I'm thinking something along the lines of “sure it covers fewer people and costs more but its better because there are no death panels”.

Certainly even some conservatives have to start to wonder how "repeal and replace" got repealed and replaced with "repeal and delay"?
Click to expand...

It's a fair question. At this point they should have had something ready to roll out immediately. An idea, something.
 
radcen said:
It's a fair question. At this point they should have had something ready to roll out immediately. An idea, something.
Click to expand...

The problem is they never will. Mandates and single payer are how you get rid of the "pre-existing condition" exclusion. Mandates are cheaper than single payer and that's why republicans came up with them in the first place. So nothing they can come up with will be cheaper and better as they promised.
 
sangha said:
Forever
Click to expand...

That is a lie, Federal taxpayers do not pay for expanded Medicaid forever nor should they. Federal Funding for expanded Medicaid goes for 3 years. Just goes to show how poorly informed many ACA supporters are

Forbes Welcome
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
That is a lie, Federal taxpayers do not pay for expanded Medicaid forever nor should they. Federal Funding for expanded Medicaid goes for 3 years. Just goes to show how poorly informed many ACA supporters are

Forbes Welcome
Click to expand...

Yes, they do. Even your article acknowledge that the feds pay for 90% of the cost of the expansion in perpetuity. The author just argues that the 10% paid by the states is too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom