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.
I think they just plan on printing, printing, printing. Quite honestly, I am shocked that as this administration and the one before it added unprecedented amounts of money to the national debt, inflation has not gone through the roof. With the exception of medical cost, everything else has been relatively tame.....which goes against all economic logic, when you print and borrow the crazy amounts of money the government has.
It's going to blow up on someone else's watch someday and then they will get the blame instead.
The Federal Government is lying to us when it comes to inflation:
For the life of me, I cannot understand why politicians keep saying they will "repeal" Obamacare. IMO, that is a bad statement to make. I have yet to hear a viable plan from any of them to replace it. If they actually had a better plan, I can see them saying something like "We will replace the ACA with a new & improved plan that will do blah, blah, blah". However, there are people who are currently using Obamacare, for better or worse, and just to say they are going to repeal it and leave it at that, it's like "yeah, and then what? Then what am I going to do?"
Besides being a horrible political move, I think it is just downright disingenuous. You can't just yank away health insurance coverage from people and a system years in the making and leave it at that.
Why should someone's health insurance be predicated on how much someone else can pay?
You're forgetting about about mandating a "pay up front for services" and the "bring out your dead service" when most Americans don't end up having enough money to pay the high cost of living in old age.
It's the law you have to have insurance, how well is that working out?
Not to bad for me personally because I get insurance through my company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin
Until Obama is out of office nothing will get done. He will veto any Bill brought in to replace, even a much better law.
No way will Obama sign any law that replaces Ocare. It's his biggest failure and he's basically a well paid golfer at this point.
Right... So we have to elect a republican just to find out what there plan is....? That sounds like the same complaint republicans had when ACA went through.
Is there a plan republicans have put forth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
And that is my problem how?
Do you plan on getting old or just dying around 65?
They say they are going to repeal Obamacare. Yeah, and then? How stupid can they be?
The comment suggests we should back to the old system, which everyone agreed was broken. So, it does sound dumb to go back to a broken system, but they say it because that is what many of their voters want to hear.
Oh, I understand it is severely flawed and should not have passed until they got it right and covered everyone properly, took care of the lawsuit issue, the state line issue and on and on. But so much has gone into it, systems have been set up in so many states and many people have gone through a lot to get on it. A politician really is not smart to just say they are going to throw it away, without first having a replacement plan ready to go.
FIRST figure out how the plan should have been done in the first place, get everything ready to go, explain how it will work, THEN make the change, Don't scare the crap out of people on it.
So you're saying that a horrible broken law that does more harm than good across the board must be left in place? Honestly, what's the up-side to not repealing the ACA?
Universal health care is too big to be run nation-wide. It's too massive and cumbersome. Let the state governments pick it up and run with it from here. That's how it should have been done all along. Running things from the federal level with a "one size fits all" approach is massively wasteful of taxpayer dollars. Doing it at a state level creates something of a competitive environment where each state is looking to do it better than the rest. If the quality of life is higher in Texas, people will move to Texas. If it's better in California, they'll move to California. If socialized medicine adds to the overall quality of life in your state, then the only logical thing to do is pick up the pieces of ACA post-repeal and run with it.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why politicians keep saying they will "repeal" Obamacare. IMO, that is a bad statement to make. I have yet to hear a viable plan from any of them to replace it. If they actually had a better plan, I can see them saying something like "We will replace the ACA with a new & improved plan that will do blah, blah, blah". However, there are people who are currently using Obamacare, for better or worse, and just to say they are going to repeal it and leave it at that, it's like "yeah, and then what? Then what am I going to do?"
Besides being a horrible political move, I think it is just downright disingenuous. You can't just yank away health insurance coverage from people and a system years in the making and leave it at that.
Republicans can't solve healthcare because there's no way around government involvement and paying for it. Democrats took the republicans model of healthcare exchanges so they don't have much left in the tool box. I predict republicans will continue to give vague solutions while not putting their name on anything.
So you're saying that a horrible broken law that does more harm than good across the board must be left in place? Honestly, what's the up-side to not repealing the ACA?
Universal health care is too big to be run nation-wide. It's too massive and cumbersome. Let the state governments pick it up and run with it from here. That's how it should have been done all along. Running things from the federal level with a "one size fits all" approach is massively wasteful of taxpayer dollars. Doing it at a state level creates something of a competitive environment where each state is looking to do it better than the rest. If the quality of life is higher in Texas, people will move to Texas. If it's better in California, they'll move to California. If socialized medicine adds to the overall quality of life in your state, then the only logical thing to do is pick up the pieces of ACA post-repeal and run with it.
ACA expanded Medicaid so states could run it.... But quite a few republicans states denied expanding Medicaid while simultaneously offering no other solutions. Texas was the largest uninsured state pre ACA and remains afterwards.
Healthcare requires solutions, solutions require governance, and republicans run an anti government/small government platform. Republicans arent capable of solving this issue.
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.
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.
