Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:48 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Without ACA funding, hospitals (especially smaller and rural) will likely shut down. And ERs will close.

And then ...
No they won't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Chesapeake Bay
6,046 posts, read 4,817,498 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
No they won't.
Without funding they will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:51 PM
 
10,225 posts, read 7,585,138 times
Reputation: 23162
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310 View Post
No more fine for me.

Obamacare rollback commences.
Where? Anyone gotta link?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:52 PM
 
21,989 posts, read 15,713,056 times
Reputation: 12943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Without ACA funding, hospitals (especially smaller and rural) will likely shut down. And ERs will close.

And then ...
They'll find a way to make us taxpayers pay for it, you watch. But many hospitals will file for bankruptcy, they already do.

9 hospital bankruptcies so far in 2016

If that is in rural areas, so be it, it's what they voted for. Trump supporters should live the results of their vote, that is what absolutely should happen. They should lose Medicaid coverage, they should lose pre-existing conditions, they should get insurance caps. It's what they voted for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:55 PM
 
10,225 posts, read 7,585,138 times
Reputation: 23162
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash View Post
No longer enforceable under Obamacare but likely will be a part of any sort of Trumpcare if he plans to provide ins for all as he claims , even if a tax you pay . Any ins plan that tries to cover all people must have healthy people paying in and not using it to fund the sick people running up medical costs . Just like you have to have good drivers paying for ins they don't use to fund the ones having wrecks . Or be funded by a tax to replace those healthy people .

Just out of curiosity, who would pay for your medical bills in the case of a catastrophic illness that ran into the 100K to save your life ?
Anyone gotta link?

I see where Trump signed something ordering others to continue to obey Obamacare laws, unless there's a hardship or something, in which case they can ignore some provisions.

But it does NOT actively change Obamacare in any way. It's just a msg to the public that the administration's goal is to ultimately replace Obamacare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:56 PM
 
1,400 posts, read 863,754 times
Reputation: 824
Unless the federal government owed you a refund the IRS had no way of actually collecting the ObamaCare fine, unless you voluntarily paid it. You probably would have still received a few nasty letters, but they couldn't levy your account or anything. It was flawed from the beginning, and Harry Reid sealed its fate when he forced it through the Senate, in spite of the fact that the blue state of Massachusetts elected republican Scott Brown. Americans did not want ObamaCare, as it was a major overreach, but they (Obama, Reid, & Pelosi) shoved it down our throats anyway. This is just a little retribution, courtesy of the deplorables and irredeemables! Choke on that, you career politicians with your elitist attitudes!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:56 PM
 
52,431 posts, read 26,628,813 times
Reputation: 21097
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post

A rational person looks at many news sources and makes their own decisions. I routinely look at about 10 that span the political spectrum.
I'm proud of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 01:57 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Without funding they will.
Somehow they survived before .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 02:01 PM
 
10,225 posts, read 7,585,138 times
Reputation: 23162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunset bulevar View Post
Catastrophic only existed in the past for people under 30 who are extremely healthy individuals. Let's do the math:

1-18 you're a child under your parents insurance. You don't pay.
18-29 you can buy catastrophic ins. 12 years total
30-64 that's 35 years, 3 times longer than the period you qualify for catastrophic
65-79 Medicare. The average American lives 15 years after their 65 birthday.
Not true.

In the free market, before Obamacare, ANYONE could buy any type of policy they wanted. If I wanted only a catastrophic policy, I could buy it, no matter my age.

Obamacare PROHIBITED certain groups of people from buying catastrophic plans.

However...and here's the trick of Obamacare...what was called a catastrophic plan before the ACA (high deductible, high OOP, and high lifetime allowance, low premium), was reclassified as a regular ins policy (high deductible, high OOP, unlimited lifetime allowance...super high premium).

Not allowing one to buy a catastrophic plan prevented people from getting a cheaper policy, and also to prevent embarrassment from people realizing that what would now be considered a catastrophic plan would indeed be: still expensive, and not worth much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2017, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Chesapeake Bay
6,046 posts, read 4,817,498 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Somehow they survived before .
The fed was directly funding them previously. But with ACA that funding dropped, with ACA now making up the difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:04 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top