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.
Obamacare provides healthcare through the private insurance sector. If your income is low enough your premium is reduced by a subsidy. Ryan wants to change Medicare from single-payer to the private insurance sector. Seniors on low income would get a voucher to help pay for the premium.
So what's the difference between Ryan's program and Obamacare? In effect is not Ryan proposing a massive expansion of Obamacare instead of repealing it?
What matters is how people vote. They ain't buying your crap.
They won't buy Ryan's program either.
If Trump allows the GOP to strip away the health coverage of
20 million Americans, the GOP will lose its majorities in 2018.
I have no idea what you think I've said which merits the inflammatory
adjective "crap", could you please embellish your thought with a more
logical argument ?
When you do an honest detailed analysis of these systems, there are tons of problems, many trade offs that are not compatible with liberty based government, and numerous variables that are unique to the country which either help or hamper the implementation of their system.
The problem is, those who promote these forms of systems don't care about the facts, they do not look at the details, they argue from a position of emotion and desire. It is exactly like gun control where people bring about their own manipulated facts to make claims that are not representative of the reality.
These systems aren't the sunshine and rainbows people think they are. Someone is losing out so that "everyone" can get their "equal" share. This however is acceptable to those who promote such collective systems as everything is evaluated from a concept of "the collective", "the good of everyone", etc... and so every individual is ignored under view.
You don't know what you're talking about.
That much is clear.
You just can't handle it that the US HealthCare system compares very, very poorly to other 1st world countries.
So what's the difference between Ryan's program and Obamacare? In effect is not Ryan proposing a massive expansion of Obamacare instead of repealing it?
Bingo. The rare person who understands.
Ryan's plan is more corporate welfare, like Obamacare is corporate welfare.
As long as health care is provided by insurance companies and for-profit
businesses, the customer or the goverment will always get screwed.
It's sad when Americans equate getting screwed with freedom, simply
because they are conceptually deficient.
If Trump allows the GOP to strip away the health coverage of
20 million Americans, the GOP will lose its majorities in 2018.
I have no idea what you think I've said which merits the inflammatory
adjective "crap", could you please embellish your thought with a more
logical argument ?
Bolded mine. This is pure fantasy. I don't think most of the electorate care that much about the small minority. 20 mil is a small minority compared to 300 mil.
Before ObamaCare the Health Ins companies would game the system by denying coverage for "pre-existing conditions".
In the buildup to ObamaCare, there was a congressional investigation.
Quote:
The Congressional investigation was limited to four insurers (Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealthcare and WellPoint/Anthem) and covered only a three-year period: 2007-2009. It found that just those four companies had denied coverage to 651,000 people – one of every seven who applied – because of pre-existing conditions. It also found the rate of denials was increasing at the companies every year.
A year-by-year analysis shows a significant increase in the number of coverage denials each year.
The insurance companies denied coverage to 172,400 people in 2007.
221,400 people in 2008.
By 2009, the number of individuals denied coverage rose to 257,100.
Between 2007 and 2009, the number of people denied coverage for pre-existing conditions increased 49 percent. During the same period, applications for insurance coverage at the four companies increased by only 16 percent.
So they discovered it paid really well to deny coverage.
Now, the Republicans will float the idea of putting people with 'pre-existing conditions' into "high risk pools" with high premiums.
But this is not a new concept.
Insurers did that in the past and by the way, once you were put into a high risk pool, there was no way out of it regardless of health improvements.
Bolded mine. This is pure fantasy. I don't think most of the electorate care that much about the small minority. 20 mil is a small minority compared to 300 mil.
Umm, except for the fact that when 120 million vote, and this 20 million is all
voting-age adults, they are more than enough to swing elections.
You don't know what you're talking about.
That much is clear.
You just can't handle it that the US HealthCare system compares very, very poorly to other 1st world countries.
Sorry, but a progressive propaganda agency is not evidence of anything.
Tell you what, go ahead and suggest a source of an international organization with an agreed-upon metric to assess different countries Health Care systems here, and we can compare results.
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.
