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)
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:27 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by East of the River View Post
The law is problematic but there are reasons the requirement was there. When the insurance industry and conservative leaders were looking for a way to prevent socialized medicine they came up with the mandate. It was presented by Newt back in 93. Its long been thought of as the only way to insure everyone without single payer.
Same here. It doesn't matter if Newt believed in it. Obama put it into law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:29 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by East of the River View Post
You did say he never supported a public option which is false.
He didn't. Again, saying he did and proving it by saying that he said it in some secret meetings is absolutely worthless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:30 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by East of the River View Post
He campaigned on it and his original proposals included it. It was killed in committee.
He did not. Posts like this help me understand why people vote for people who lie on camera with a straight face.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:34 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469 View Post
[/b]


Since seniors overwhelming vote republican, there would be a huge revolt by them. I don't thing it will be changed because of the backlash republicans would get. They just may be voted out. Don't underestimate the seniors
This right here really isn't that hard to understand. But then again, we had post after post after post from people not being able to understand how a Trump could win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:35 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
I don't think Paul Ryan would have got this far with it if he hadn't found a way to get it passed with a Republican president. That means also finding a few insurers that will at least pretend in the beginning.
Ryan will be lucky if he makes it 4 months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:41 AM
 
1,850 posts, read 820,628 times
Reputation: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
He didn't. Again, saying he did and proving it by saying that he said it in some secret meetings is absolutely worthless.
LOL, "he only said it in secret, so it doesn't count. Everyone knows that!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:56 AM
 
Location: louisville
4,754 posts, read 2,739,460 times
Reputation: 1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
If I said here what I want to say I would likely get slapped by the mods. Nothing gets written off. The costs are just moved elsewhere.
That's why I touched on the settlement process. You are that it's a shift. But for most lay people it's easier to use a term they are familiar with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:58 AM
 
34,054 posts, read 17,071,203 times
Reputation: 17212
What would be far more effective than a mandate would be to make medical debt non-dischargeable via Bankruptcy Court, with the IRS used to collect, just as they do with student loan debt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:56 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
What would be far more effective than a mandate would be to make medical debt non-dischargeable via Bankruptcy Court, with the IRS used to collect, just as they do with student loan debt.
Why should medical debt be placed above other debt?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 06:11 AM
 
8,312 posts, read 3,927,691 times
Reputation: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
So Trump plans to announce Tom Price as HHS Secretary. Tom Price is an Obamacare foe and also wants to Conservative reform for Medicare.

Tom Price seems to think the solution is tort reform, which is a joke since half the states already have tort reform and the insurance companies did not pass costs on to patients, they just kept the money.

Last week, Price said whatever Republicans do to replace Obama's health care law will bear a 'significant resemblance' to a 2015 measure that was vetoed by the president.

That bill would have gutted some of the health care law's main features: Medicaid expansion, subsidies to help middle-class Americans buy private policies, the tax penalties for individuals who refused to get coverage and several taxes to support coverage expansion.


And the most predictable part:

Price said Republicans want to address 'the real cost drivers' of health care price spikes, which he said were not necessarily sicker patients, but a heavy regulatory burden, taxes and lawsuits against medical professionals.

Trump to nominate anti-Obamacare Georgia representative Tom Price as health secretary | Daily Mail Online

Good luck with health coverage. It looks like they will try to keep pre-existing conditions and kids on policies, maybe they will let insurance companies put in spending caps and tort reform. Basically the only thing Trump will bring for health coverage is tort reform, pre-existing conditions and kids on policies.

And since Price is a big advocate of reforming Medicare, combine that with Paul Ryan and Medicare is definitely going to be changed. There's no way it won't be.


Turns out, Price supports insurance companies selling bare-bones plans and, in some cases, denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. He recently said he expects Republicans to move forward with legislation to privatize Medicare out of existence as early as next summer.

I find it highly amusing that the Trump supporters are the ones that will be hit the hardest by such changes. No matter how much yowling they do about how much better we would be in a privatized system - most of them are TOTALLY dependent on Medicare to have any chance at a reasonably safe retirement. It will be an equal opportunity screwing of the American populace, both Trump supporters and non-supporters - by big insurance, big pharma, and big medicine.
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 05:15 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