Winners only.

[SlugButter]

Stating facts is not taking sides.

It is a fact that Republicans were crying the ACA was going to crush insurance companies. Then it turned out profits actually increased. But they were committed, so they kept doing what they could to eliminate it. NOT fix it or make it better, just eliminate and regress.
Great plan.

The ACA is the Affordable Care Act. It was not meant to improve healthcare, it was meant to assure coverage for all citizens, affordably.
After is was enacted, there was a marked increase in insured Americans, and average costs did go down (not by much, but a decrease is a decrease).

I’m interested in hearing which of these statements is incorrect.

So your saying that the ACA was just to give billionaire insurance companies more customers, but wasn’t supposed to improve care? I agree. It was a load of BS from jump street. None of these statements are incorrect. Politically spun, but not incorrect.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

So your saying that the ACA was just to give billionaire insurance companies more customers, but wasn’t supposed to improve care? I agree. It was a load of BS from jump street. None of these statements are incorrect. Politically spun, but not incorrect.

“ (1) to reform the private insurance market—especially for individuals and small-group purchasers, (2) to expand Medicaid to the working poor with income up to 133% of the federal poverty level, and (3) to change the way that medical decisions are made. All 3 objectives rely primarily on private choices rather than government regulation and are rooted in expectations of rational decision making shaped by incentives but unfettered by other constraints.”

These are the three expressed purposes of the ACA. Not an interpretation. Not political spin.

Unlike owning aFerrari or a 15,000sq ft home, basic healthcare should not be something that only the wealthy can have.
Before discussing the ACA any further, would you agree with that statement?

 

[SlugButter]

“ (1) to reform the private insurance market—especially for individuals and small-group purchasers, (2) to expand Medicaid to the working poor with income up to 133% of the federal poverty level, and (3) to change the way that medical decisions are made. All 3 objectives rely primarily on private choices rather than government regulation and are rooted in expectations of rational decision making shaped by incentives but unfettered by other constraints.”

These are the three expressed purposes of the ACA. Not an interpretation. Not political spin.

Unlike owning aFerrari or a 15,000sq ft home, basic healthcare should not be something that only the wealthy can have.
Before discussing the ACA any further, would you agree with that statement?

I’m for single payer healthcare. We all deserve healthcare. We are being taxed at European socialist levels already. May as well get the benefits from it. The ACA just avoids the actual problems and placates a few poor people and free market advocates.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

I’m for single payer healthcare. We all deserve healthcare. We are being taxed at European socialist levels already. May as well get the benefits from it. The ACA just avoids the actual problems and placates a few poor people and free market advocates.

What if we didn't have healthcare, but very local communities took care of each other? Healthcare shouldn't be a centralized system. With healthcare, insurance companies only cover certain things in certain ways. I would want open ended healthcare where I could choose any treatment that I wanted, and not have a bunch of wasted money by having to pay a bunch of bureaucrats to crunch a bunch of numbers on healthcare. The truth is people should care about each other within their very local communities and depend on each other for resources, such as healthcare. F*ck paying bureaucrats to financially manage everything, and f*ck the insurance companies for choosing what types of treatments "are acceptable". I've been to so many medical places not covered by good insurance, really, and they've been more help than the places that are covered by insurance. I went without health insurance for 3 years, because my health is really bad and it was cheaper to pay out of pocket, and most of what I did wasn't covered, and what a surprise, I got much better. Don't ever give your medical rights over. That's what you do with healthcare, when you want a tax based system to pay for it. They get to choose what medical treatments you do and don't get to have, regardless of effectiveness or not. It's all tied into pharma companies and plain greed. It's designed to keep you within a certain field of care that keeps you directly under the control of the system, and it's not in your best interest by any means. Probably in your worst interest. You've got energy and dollars they need to extract through their systems; they don't care if you get better, as long as you're forking out money on their "covered" treatments.

What a surprise that most of the stuff I did wasn't covered by my health insurance....it's almost like insurance companies wouldn't pay for medical treatments that actually improved my health. So you want a bunch of lazy and greedy gov f*ckheads to manage the nation's healthcare? I'm not saying you do; I am asking you a biased question in a certain tone for an effect.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

What if we didn't have healthcare, but very local communities took care of each other? Healthcare shouldn't be a centralized system. With healthcare, insurance companies only cover certain things in certain ways. I would want open ended healthcare where I could choose any treatment that I wanted, and not have a bunch of wasted money by having to pay a bunch of bureaucrats to crunch a bunch of numbers on healthcare. The truth is people should care about each other within their very local communities and depend on each other for resources, such as healthcare. F*ck paying bureaucrats to financially manage everything, and f*ck the insurance companies for choosing what types of treatments "are acceptable". I've been to so many medical places not covered by good insurance, really, and they've been more help than the places that are covered by insurance. I went without health insurance for 3 years, because my health is really bad and it was cheaper to pay out of pocket, and most of what I did wasn't covered, and what a surprise, I got much better. Don't ever give your medical rights over. That's what you do with healthcare, when you want a tax based system to pay for it. They get to choose what medical treatments you do and don't get to have, regardless of effectiveness or not. It's all tied into pharma companies and plain greed. It's designed to keep you within a certain field of care that keeps you directly under the control of the system, and it's not in your best interest by any means. Probably in your worst interest. You've got energy and dollars they need to extract through their systems; they don't care if you get better, as long as you're forking out money on their "covered" treatments.

What a surprise that most of the stuff I did wasn't covered by my health insurance....it's almost like insurance companies wouldn't pay for medical treatments that actually improved my health. So you want a bunch of lazy and greedy gov f*ckheads to manage the nation's healthcare? I'm not saying you do; I am asking you a biased question in a certain tone for an effect.

As soon as you start posting Pollyanna ideas about a solution, it really ruins anyvalid things you might have to say.

How about we all go out and shovel the streets TOGETHER when there is a snowstorm? A reality that is long gone and could never happen again.

Solutions have to be based in reality and have to be for the vast majority. It’s just the way it is when we have a society the size we do.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I’m for single payer healthcare. We all deserve healthcare. We are being taxed at European socialist levels already. May as well get the benefits from it. The ACA just avoids the actual problems and placates a few poor people and free market advocates.

1. You would think in a country as advanced as we claim to be, a single-payer system would be welcome and have been in place long ago. Nope. But the ACA is a step towards it, yet people hate that too. Who gets the most lobby money from the Big Three? Be interested in finding out.
2.We pay taxes but definitely not on the level of other countries that are on a single-payer system. Our neighbors to the north pay a fair bit more on average. Our neighbors across the pond pay a LOT MORE.

 

[SlugButter]

1. You would think in a country as advanced as we claim to be, a single-payer system would be welcome and have been in place long ago. Nope. But the ACA is a step towards it, yet people hate that too. Who gets the most lobby money from the Big Three? Be interested in finding out.
2.We pay taxes but definitely not on the level of other countries that are on a single-payer system. Our neighbors to the north pay a fair bit more on average. Our neighbors across the pond pay a LOT MORE.

You have to add up all the taxes we pay. Fed, state, county, city, sales, property, etc. We pay a ton of our wages by percentage to tax. Can’t go on straight numbers without doing the exchange rate either. I’d be willing to bet we aren’t far off by percentage of wages earned.

 

[Slo_Ride 5,000+ posts]

I hate Obamacare. I don't need health insurance, and do not want it.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Your logic is incredibly flawed.
You get t-boned by someone who runs a light at an intersection. YOUR fault for being there?
Cop pulls you over for speeding and decides to shoot you. YOUR fault for being there?

Not how the laws in our country work, nor is it how normal logic of reality works.

Someone breaking the law does not allow us to break the laws in our treatment of them. Hell, we save the lives of enemy soldiers we’ve shot and captured.
You know, those pesky laws and all.

Wow. Biden's idiots TOLD THEM TO COME. ALLOWED THEM ACROSS THE BOARDER. CAUSED THE SITUATION. Why are you trying to use irrelevant examples that don't even remotely relate to this government telling illegals to come to the boarder then allowing them to cross into the country. If they didn't invite them, there would be no separation of kids from their parents. What are you smoking because we all would like some.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Quoting your very words is NOT an interpretation. Do you put actual effort into not knowing the most basic of things?

If you actually "quoted" anything, I wouldn't argue with you.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

If you actually "quoted" anything, I wouldn't argue with you.

I have done it from your posts more than enough times. You have actually said that quotes of your very own posts were BS, and that I was claiming things you never said.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Wow. Biden's idiots TOLD THEM TO COME. ALLOWED THEM ACROSS THE BOARDER. CAUSED THE SITUATION. Why are you trying to use irrelevant examples that don't even remotely relate to this government telling illegals to come to the boarder then allowing them to cross into the country. If they didn't invite them, there would be no separation of kids from their parents. What are you smoking because we all would like some.

The border crisis started during the Trump administration. Please, provide proof that an open invitation was actually made the way you describe it.
Quotes or links to proof. Not feelings. Not opinions. Not beliefs.
Proof.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

The border crisis started during the Trump administration. Please, provide proof that an open invitation was actually made the way you describe it.
Quotes or links to proof. Not feelings. Not opinions. Not beliefs.
Proof.

Links????????? That's is what the Biden administration did... they said for them to come and they would let them in. Proof??? Really????
You lefty's really do live in your own blind world.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

I have done it from your posts more than enough times. You have actually said that quotes of your very own posts were BS, and that I was claiming things you never said.

I hear you. It's already known that you ignore context and just come up with your own version of events to fit your argument.

 

[SlugButter]

The border crisis started during the Trump administration. Please, provide proof that an open invitation was actually made the way you describe it.
Quotes or links to proof. Not feelings. Not opinions. Not beliefs.
Proof.

The border crisis did not start under Trump. I literally live on the border and there are tons more people coming through where I live than any time in the last 15 years I’ve lived here. They had to close all the road side stations here to divert agents to the border because there are so many people crossing. Not sure where you’re getting your info from.