GOP poised to win the PR war

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 27, 2017

MrPeanut said:
In the short run you are probably right. By 2027 the benefits to the middle class sunset, and over the next decade we will see a premium rise caused by the repeal of the individual mandate. In the long run people will feel this bill in a bad way.

.

I believe you are wrong on both counts. If the ecomomy continues to grow the tax cuts will be extended, just as Bush's tax cuts were. As for premium increases due to the repeal of the individual obamacare mandate, are you serious? The premiums have taken off like rockets since the day Obamacare went into effect. The increases are due to one the mandate, and two the insanely stupid one size fits all approach of Obamacare. repealing the individual mandate is only one of a few things that need to be done to bring the premiums down. The employer mandate should be repealed as well. To put it bluntly, when the health insurance providers have a captive customer base, there is no incentive for competition and it's no longer market based. And the insanely stupid one size fits all approach where the government decides what must be included in your policy needs to go away as well.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 27, 2017

MrPeanut said:
You are saying there is a 100 percent chance middle class tax cuts will become permanent. Do you really feel comfortable making that statement? What about our Congress convinces you that they will be able to pull that off? I don't care about the philosophy behind repealing the individual mandate. The real effects will disproportionately hurt the middle class.

How so?

MrPeanut · Dec 27, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
How so?

When it comes to premium rise we are going to have two competing answers that I am sure won't go anywhere. You will say lack of competition is the main driver in costs, and I will say uncertainty is the main driver. The tax plan will hurt the middle class because the benefits will sunset, and I believe the removal of the individual mandate will raise individual health insurance costs by allowing healthy people to avoid signing up. I don't trust that Congress will make middle class tax cuts permanent because they are basing everything off of 3 to 5 percent growth which they probably won't achieve.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 27, 2017

MrPeanut said:
When it comes to premium rise we are going to have two competing answers that I am sure won't go anywhere. You will say lack of competition is the main driver in costs, and I will say uncertainty is the main driver.

We will just have to disagree on that one. When you are forcing everyone into a captive customer base, you are utterly destroying market competition. I have seen the same thing occur when individual states made automobile insurance mandatory.

The tax plan will hurt the middle class because the benefits will sunset, and I believe the removal of the individual mandate will raise individual health insurance costs by allowing healthy people to avoid signing up.

Again you are in the position of claiming that one of the main causes of the rates going up must be preserved allegedly to prevent the rates from going up. I'll put it to you bluntly. Obamacare has royally screwed up health insurance and to the point where even after we pass something better, things will not improve rapidly. However health insurance will only begin improving when we have done away with the individual mandate, the employer mandate and the one size fits all approach. Obamacare is an authritarian approach to healthcare insurance. We are a capitalist society, not a socialist society. Forcing the young and healthy to kick in for more then their own risk just so some obese tobacco abusing couch potato can get a break in rates is non-productive and has not worked anyway. The young and healthy are not signing up in the numbers expected. They would rather pay the tax penalty then go insolvent.

I don't trust that Congress will make middle class tax cuts permanent because they are basing everything off of 3 to 5 percent growth which they probably won't achieve.

Keep in mind, the cut in the corporate tax rate is permanent. it will be even more beneficial to the economy then the individual tax cuts. The economy will continue to thrive and the congress will likely extend the tax cuts or make them permanent.

MrPeanut · Dec 27, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
We will just have to disagree on that one. When you are forcing everyone into a captive customer base, you are utterly destroying market competition. I have seen the same thing occur when individual states made automobile insurance mandatory.

Again you are in the position of claiming that one of the main causes of the rates going up must be preserved allegedly to prevent the rates from going up. I'll put it to you bluntly. Obamacare has royally screwed up health insurance and to the point where even after we pass something better, things will not improve rapidly. However health insurance will only begin improving when we have done away with the individual mandate, the employer mandate and the one size fits all approach. Obamacare is an authritarian approach to healthcare insurance. We are a capitalist society, not a socialist society. Forcing the young and healthy to kick in for more then their own risk just so some obese tobacco abusing couch potato can get a break in rates is non-productive and has not worked anyway. The young and healthy are not signing up in the numbers expected. They would rather pay the tax penalty then go insolvent.

Keep in mind, the cut in the corporate tax rate is permanent. it will be even more beneficial to the economy then the individual tax cuts. The economy will continue to thrive and the congress will likely extend the tax cuts or make them permanent.

There is a reason health insurance was such a hot topic in 2008. It wasn't because it was fantastic. I'll be honest, I support a nationalized health care system. I feel like I need to support the ACA right now because repealing the individual mandate is just another way of undercutting the ACA. That isn't good for people. The effective tax rate for corporations is often times much lower than the statutory rate. If they were going to create massive amounts of new jobs they could have done it by now.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 28, 2017

MrPeanut said:
There is a reason health insurance was such a hot topic in 2008. It wasn't because it was fantastic. I'll be honest, I support a nationalized health care system. I feel like I need to support the ACA right now because repealing the individual mandate is just another way of undercutting the ACA. That isn't good for people. The effective tax rate for corporations is often times much lower than the statutory rate. If they were going to create massive amounts of new jobs they could have done it by now.

You are feigning ignorance of the damage Obamacare has done. No, healthcare insurance was not fantastic. Reform was needed, however it needed to be market based. Obamacare made the health insurance crisis much worse. work with me here. Affordable healthcare Act? My rates immediate tripled and my deductable went up 500%. How is that affordable? The individual mandate was not undercut until now and the rates have gone nowhere but up and up and up.. And a nationalized healthcare system would be even worse. it would virtually eliminate the profit motive in healthcare. at that point government bean counters would decide how many hospital beds would be available, how much high tech diagnostic equipment would be purchased, how many doctors could be hired, etc. Can you say rationed healthcare? On the latter, if you respond with the "it's now rationed by cost" nonsense, I will not bother to respond.

MrPeanut · Dec 28, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
You are feigning ignorance of the damage Obamacare has done. No, healthcare insurance was not fantastic. Reform was needed, however it needed to be market based. Obamacare made the health insurance crisis much worse. work with me here. Affordable healthcare Act? My rates immediate tripled and my deductable went up 500%. How is that affordable? The individual mandate was not undercut until now and the rates have gone nowhere but up and up and up.. And a nationalized healthcare system would be even worse. it would virtually eliminate the profit motive in healthcare. at that point government bean counters would decide how many hospital beds would be available, how much high tech diagnostic equipment would be purchased, how many doctors could be hired, etc. Can you say rationed healthcare? On the latter, if you respond with the "it's now rationed by cost" nonsense, I will not bother to respond.

The ACA failed at making individual health insurance affordable. A lot of that was not only due to forcing insurers to actually cover sick people, but from uncertainty created by the constant tug of war in Congress over the direction to take with healthcare. The vast majority of people qualify for government subsidies to help with costs, but I'll agree that the ACA is not a pretty system. I don't agree that it should be discarded so we can return to a system similar to our previous one. Cutting costs is not the hard part by itself. Cutting costs and covering people who have medical issues is the hard part. I don't agree that nationalized healthcare would be worse at all. It is the only system that effectively controls costs, and covers the entire population. I don't see how "it's now rationed by cost" is nonsense, but if you prefer to ignore it that's fine by me.

What is your idea of a working healthcare system? I mean beyond just saying competition as if that always leads to competing upwards in quality and never downwards.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 28, 2017

MrPeanut said:
The ACA failed at making individual health insurance affordable. A lot of that was not only due to forcing insurers to actually cover sick people, but from uncertainty created by the constant tug of war in Congress over the direction to take with healthcare. The vast majority of people qualify for government subsidies to help with costs, but I'll agree that the ACA is not a pretty system. I don't agree that it should be discarded so we can return to a system similar to our previous one. Cutting costs is not the hard part by itself. Cutting costs and covering people who have medical issues is the hard part. I don't agree that nationalized healthcare would be worse at all. It is the only system that effectively controls costs, and covers the entire population. I don't see how "it's now rationed by cost" is nonsense, but if you prefer to ignore it that's fine by me.

What is your idea of a working healthcare system? I mean beyond just saying competition as if that always leads to competing upwards in quality and never downwards.

The problem is that national healthcare attempts to controls costs by limiting the amount of healthcare available. They simply ration healthcare in every way imaginable. And it does not really matter that you do not want Obamacare to go away for anything other then national healthcare. Obamacare is going away. It's just a matter of time. Repealing the individual mandate is a dagger in the heart of Obamacare. And it will not be replaced by national healthcare. Perhaps if the democrat party get's it's ass handed to them in the 2018 midterms, they will stop playing resistance and work with the republicans to come up with truly market based healthcare system to replace whatever is left of obamacare.

MrPeanut · Dec 29, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
The problem is that national healthcare attempts to controls costs by limiting the amount of healthcare available. They simply ration healthcare in every way imaginable. And it does not really matter that you do not want Obamacare to go away for anything other then national healthcare. Obamacare is going away. It's just a matter of time. Repealing the individual mandate is a dagger in the heart of Obamacare. And it will not be replaced by national healthcare. Perhaps if the democrat party get's it's ass handed to them in the 2018 midterms, they will stop playing resistance and work with the republicans to come up with truly market based healthcare system to replace whatever is left of obamacare.

That's what I've been saying. The individual mandate was the glue that held the ACA together. Getting rid of it will cause massive destabilization of an already unstable individual insurance market. We are going to have to disagree on the effectiveness of nationalized healthcare. You seem to have this idea that it's a horrible system even though it's very popular in every country that has it. What is your vision of a truly market based healthcare system?

beancounter · Dec 29, 2017

Without the individual mandate, the ACA will fail, no doubt.

But what do the Republicans plan to replace it with?

The system that was in place prior to the ACA was far from ideal. Cost were increasing annually by double digits. Do you really think the majority of people want to go back to that?

Without a viable replacement, the Republicans will be shooting themselves in the foot with a bazooka politically.

Born Free · Dec 29, 2017

beancounter said:
Without the individual mandate, the ACA will fail, no doubt.

But what do the Republicans plan to replace it with?

The system that was in place prior to the ACA was far from ideal. Cost were increasing annually by double digits. Do you really think the majority of people want to go back to that?

Without a viable replacement, the Republicans will be shooting themselves in the foot with a bazooka politically.

I take it you believe the Dems who invented this disaster called Obamacare has no stake in correcting it. I suggest otherwise they do have a stake in working with the Pubs in getting a health care system that WORKS. They were sent to Washington to work for the people, but so far they are the party of NO. And the party of No ideas, No leadership, NO working for the people and No future.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 29, 2017

MrPeanut said:
That's what I've been saying. The individual mandate was the glue that held the ACA together. Getting rid of it will cause massive destabilization of an already unstable individual insurance market.

How can we massively destabilize something that is already massively destabilized? If the individual mandate was glue, it very ineffective glue. It's not sticking to anything. And it is still an authoritarian way of funding health insurance.

We are going to have to disagree on the effectiveness of nationalized healthcare. You seem to have this idea that it's a horrible system even though it's very popular in every country that has it.

I suppose it depends on what you are willing to accept. The majority of Americans are not going to accept rationed healthcare. And the US version would merely be an overburdened Medicare system. Our Government can barely handle Medicare for seniors.

What is your vision of a truly market based healthcare system?

To go back to what it was before the government started tinkering with it. the one size fits all obamacare approach does not work and never will. Need serious tort reform and loosening up on HSAs. Also need to have no restrictions on selling insurance across state lines. And many doctor groups are now offering concierge care for all the routine stuff.

beancounter · Dec 29, 2017

Born Free said:
I take it you believe the Dems who invented this disaster called Obamacare has no stake in correcting it. I suggest otherwise they do have a stake in working with the Pubs in getting a health care system that WORKS. They were sent to Washington to work for the people, but so far they are the party of NO. And the party of No ideas, No leadership, NO working for the people and No future.

You break it, you buy it.

Why should the Dems be responsible for fixing something that the Reps intentionally threw a wrench into?

If your car got a flat tire, would you intentionally puncture it with a second hole?

Regardless, the Reps don't need the Dems. They can pass anything they want along party lines, so it's up to them to fix.

The buck stops with those in charge, and right now, that's the Reps.

Born Free · Dec 30, 2017

beancounter said:
You break it, you buy it.

Why should the Dems be responsible for fixing something that the Reps intentionally threw a wrench into?

If your car got a flat tire, would you intentionally puncture it with a second hole?

Regardless, the Reps don't need the Dems. They can pass anything they want along party lines, so it's up to them to fix.

The buck stops with those in charge, and right now, that's the Reps.

No need to go any further, your a denier of the reality of Obamacare was self destructing.

Former GOP · Dec 30, 2017

This tax bill was anything but conservative. Sure it gives most Americans some tax relief but the middle class will mostly see minor cuts. It doesn't cut government spending, in fact it balloons the deficit even further.

Another thing I dislike about this bill is the child tax credits. Parents are already getting a $1,000 per child credit, and now it will be increased to $2,000 per child. This is nothing more than free government money handed to someone just for popping out children. Not conservative or fiscally responsible at all. In fact this idea is more along the lines of socialism.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 31, 2017

beancounter said:
You break it, you buy it.

Why should the Dems be responsible for fixing something that the Reps intentionally threw a wrench into?

But then Obamacare was already broken right out of the gate. the republicans did not break it...the democrats broke it by their own design. The republicans are merely attempting to put obamacare out of it's and the population's misery.

If your car got a flat tire, would you intentionally puncture it with a second hole?

In Obamacare's case, it was a blown engine to begin with. The republicans are just calling the tow truck.

Regardless, the Reps don't need the Dems. They can pass anything they want along party lines, so it's up to them to fix.

If the republicans voted strictly down partisan lines as the democrats do, you would have a point. As much as I disagree with the few republicans who tanked the healthcare proposals that were offered to repeal and replace obamacare, they were at least attempting to represent their own districts.

The buck stops with those in charge, and right now, that's the Reps.

I'll meet you half way on that one. The republicans campaigned for seven years to repeal and replace obamacare, even passed it in the house and senate once while Obama was president, knowing he would veto it. Then when the time and opportunity came, failed to get it done. Even so, the republicans do not own the healthcare mess that the democrats created. They have the opportunity to take responsible ownership and pass something better, however I hope they do not make the same insanely stupid mistake that the democrats made when they designed and passed obamacare. The republicans need to one make sure that there is public support for whatever they come up with and two give the democrats opportunity to constructively work with them to come up with something both sides could live with.....as the democrats should have done in 2009.

beancounter · Dec 31, 2017

Born Free said:
No need to go any further, your a denier of the reality of Obamacare was self destructing.

Source? (FOX news, Infowars, and other blatantly conservative rags, are not valid sources...)

The ACA was a compromise bill (between different players in the industry), so it came out of the gate limping.

The biggest issues that made things worse:

1. They overestimated the number of young healthy people who would sign up.
2. The website went live without sufficient testing.
3. The Republicans successfully framed the narrative in terms of the individual mandate as a infringement on person freedoms.
4. They had to work within the framework of each state, making it difficult to apply consistently.
5. States with Republican control did everything in their power to cause issues/exacerbate existing issues at the state level.

beancounter · Dec 31, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
The republicans need to one make sure that there is public support for whatever they come up with and two give the democrats opportunity to constructively work with them to come up with something both sides could live with.....as the democrats should have done in 2009.

Without an individual mandate (or whatever they decide to call it), anything they come up with will run into the same issues as the ACA.

Their only alternative is to revert back to the system in place prior to the ACA, but people won't like that either (poor coverage and high premiums that increase by double digits annually).

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 31, 2017

beancounter said:
Without an individual mandate (or whatever they decide to call it), anything they come up with will run into the same issues as the ACA.

I completely disagree. The individual mandate is one of the two biggest single reasons Obamacare has been such a massive failure. And the man date was authoritarian. Nobody should be forced to buy something that in so many cases costs more then a home mortgage payment every month and comes with a deductible that prevents you from benefiting from it until you have spent $6000.00 to $12,000.00 out of pocket in any given year. What's the point?

Their only alternative is to revert back to the system in place prior to the ACA, but people won't like that either (poor coverage and high premiums that increase by double digits annually).

The ideal scenario would be repeal and replace with the replace being market based and something both sides could live with. Perhaps the repeal of the individual mandate will bring that on sooner then it would otherwise happen.

beancounter · Dec 31, 2017

Not paying the individual mandate creates a huge loophole, that allows people to get emergency medical care for free. If someone get into a major accident, is treated at a hospital, but can't afford to pay, then who pays the bill? The taxpayer does. At least the IM covers this risk to some degree. Everyone is going to need medical care eventually. Paying into the system now to keep it viable in the future (when you will likely need it), is not unreasonable.

Health plans like you described ("market based systems") with high premiums and high deductibles were around long before the ACA existed. Without an employer paying part of the costs, people will face those same high cost/high deductible issues that you claim are unique to the ACA.

ObamacareFail said:
I completely disagree. The individual mandate is one of the two biggest single reasons Obamacare has been such a massive failure. And the man date was authoritarian. Nobody should be forced to buy something that in so many cases costs more then a home mortgage payment every month and comes with a deductible that prevents you from benefiting from it until you have spent $6000.00 to $12,000.00 out of pocket in any given year. What's the point?

The ideal scenario would be repeal and replace with the replace being market based and something both sides could live with. Perhaps the repeal of the individual mandate will bring that on sooner then it would otherwise happen.

Born Free · Dec 31, 2017

beancounter said:
Without an individual mandate (or whatever they decide to call it), anything they come up with will run into the same issues as the ACA.

I'll bet you can't wait for your liberal party to be back in power so they can mandate you buy an electric car.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 31, 2017

beancounter said:
Not paying the individual mandate creates a huge loophole, that allows people to get emergency medical care for free. If someone get into a major accident, is treated at a hospital, but can't afford to pay, then who pays the bill? The taxpayer does. At least the IM covers this risk to some degree. Everyone is going to need medical care eventually. Paying into the system now to keep it viable in the future (when you will likely need it), is not unreasonable.

One, the individual mandate is failing to do what you are claiming to do as many are just opting to pay the fine

Health plans like you described ("market based systems") with high premiums and high deductibles were around long before the ACA existed. Without an employer paying part of the costs, people will face those same high cost/high deductible issues that you claim are unique to the ACA.

Again, you are going on false assumptions. The only employers who are really paying for a significant portion of their employees healthcare are the big companies, mostly fortune 500 companies that can afford it. The majority of Americans do not work for those types of employers. Most Americans are employed by small businesses. Those small businesses are primarily just offering group health insurance with the employee primarily footing the bill. When Obamacare canceled my individual policy, I checked the rates for my employer offered health insurance and the rates were even higher. and the problem is that the employer mandate is killing many job opportunities. As soon as the employer mandate hit, my employer restricted all new hire with rare exception to part time employment so they would not have to provide healthcare. I know you would like for Obamacare to be rescued at some level, however it is simply a failed concept that has never performed as advertised. It benefits a small few at great expense to everyone else.

beancounter · Dec 31, 2017

ObamacareFail said:
O It benefits a small few at great expense to everyone else.

You mean like the GOP tax plan?

:devil:

Thank you, that was a good explanation! Personally, I have worked for small companies that offered subsidized health insurance, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the exception, not the rule.

LetsGoBrandon · Dec 31, 2017

beancounter said:
You mean like the GOP tax plan? :devil:

Thank you, that was a good explanation! Personally, I have worked for small companies that offered subsidized health insurance, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the exception, not the rule.

That is the exception, not the rule. Most small businesses cannot afford to subsidize health insurance at today's rates. As for the GOP tax plan, everyone who pays federal income taxes gets a tax cut. if anyone is hurt by the tax cuts bill...it's those who live in overtaxed blue states as state income taxes as state and local income taxes will no longer be subsidized by the feds. However in the long run that's a good thing as those of you in the blue states may finally hold your state and local politicians accountable. They will either lower the taxes or see a mass exodus to states that don't rape their incomes.

Moderate Right · Jan 7, 2018

MrPeanut said:
That's what I've been saying. The individual mandate was the glue that held the ACA together. Getting rid of it will cause massive destabilization of an already unstable individual insurance market. We are going to have to disagree on the effectiveness of nationalized healthcare. You seem to have this idea that it's a horrible system even though it's very popular in every country that has it. What is your vision of a truly market based healthcare system?

It's popular because it's basically free. Quality wise, it sucks. If we instituted single payer healthcare in the US, probably about 2/3's of Americans would see their quality of care plummet.

GOP poised to win the PR war

Active member