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.
The IRS has published the average effective federal income tax rate for each income group. Care to list them so we can see which income groups are paying what tax rate?
If you want to know so badly, then look it up yourself.
I saw a member of the Freedom Caucus call a tax credit an "entitlement". How can it be an entitlement when it is your own tax money?
The working poor can only pay so much. I don't have a problem helping out those who work for a living.
What do you propose? Let someone with an untreated sinus infection develop a brain abscess and DIE? Is that it?
Why is it important that they repeal first if they are truly looking for solutions.
Repeal without a solution would be a worse disaster for too many people/patients. Of course they have been looking for conservative solutions for decades. IMO there are some conservative band-aids, but no good overall solutions. This is why we get Obamacare-lite after all these years. As a doc I have been heavily involved with reform discussions since the early '90's. I joined forums such as this one along with medical forums (as I am a doc) to continue my search for conservative HC solutions.
There are no good overall conservative solutions, especially for the parts of Obamacare that are staying. Like age 26 and pre-existing. They can shift moneys and make solutions sound more conservative, but all that does is shift supports from one group to another. And that will not be a good enough solution for the right or left.
In a very general way conservatives and HC will remain in a quandary IMO, much like liberals and the military. Of course the national defense is in the Constitution, whereas HC per is not. So that continues to stoke some fires.
Well the last 6 years the GOP could have recommended some changes to address the deficiencies with the ACA rather than just repeal. I think they are just now seeing just how difficult to is to make changes to the ACA. This was the same for Hillary Care in 93 and Obama Care in 2009. We will see if Trump can use his Art of the Deal to bring the GOP together but right now it's a minefield of different factions.
Trump needs to bring in the left in using his magic arts for this to succeed long term. Otherwise he makes the same mistakes with partisan Obamacare.
I got screwed by your idol when he lied and I lost my healthcare plan.
Anything else has to be an improvement.
If you work for BNSF (which you have said you do), you belong to a union which means that you never lost health insurance.
Your health insurance probably changed but that is not unusual. Welcome to the world of those who don't belong to a union. You know, people who actually work and don't sit there filing claims and trying to get paid for not doing anything.
I'm not going to like what they come up with so I'm good with just scrapping it and hoping people actually learn a lesson for next time.
Probably so.
Scrapping the ACA and kicking people off health care, who are you teaching a lesson to the 10M people on ACA.
It won't happen, this is just GOP pandering to fulfill a campaign promise that they have been chanting for the last 6 years. They need to do the hard work first and it appears they are not up to the task.
I'm a conservative and this seems like a poor start. Every indication is it will be heavily modified or it won't pass the Senate, if it even passes the House.
They haven't proposed anything that makes HC more affordable for patients, only less federal spending. Until they address the underlying costs of healthcare **, the rest of it is just rearranging the furniture to suit some, and not others.
There was a lot of rhetoric about encouraging competition (across state lines) and negotiating pharma prices - neither were mentioned in this first proposal. Supposedly that's to come later, but IMO attacking underlying costs of health care should come first - or at least as part of phase I.
**higher than any other developed country, and twice the average of all other developed countries
Repeal without a solution would be a worse disaster for too many people/patients. Of course they have been looking for conservative solutions for decades. IMO there are some conservative band-aids, but no good overall solutions. This is why we get Obamacare-lite after all these years. As a doc I have been heavily involved with reform discussions since the early '90's. I joined forums such as this one along with medical forums (as I am a doc) to continue my search for conservative HC solutions.
There are no good overall conservative solutions, especially for the parts of Obamacare that are staying. Like age 26 and pre-existing. They can shift moneys and make solutions sound more conservative, but all that does is shift supports from one group to another. And that will not be a good enough solution for the right or left.
In a very general way conservatives and HC will remain in a quandary IMO, much like liberals and the military. Of course the national defense is in the Constitution, whereas HC per is not. So that continues to stoke some fires.
Anything they come up with will be a modified ACA, I don't care if you call it Trump care but they need to find a happy median. They want to roll back the cost of the program but at the same time they don't have a real solution to capturing healthy people. I don't see tax credits being inviting for those in their 20's and I see very little in the way of addressing out of control costs for medical care.
One of the problems with the existing ACA and Medicare & Medicaid is that there is no or very little skin in the game for the patients.
Last edited by Goodnight; 03-09-2017 at 08:39 AM..
Amen to that. Most folks I know - in a urban/suburban area are not members, or initially members drop their membership after tiring of the 'marketing' rips offs. Want to pay more, buy an AARP marketing-tie in product.
I'm a conservative and this seems like a poor start. Every indication is it will be heavily modified or it won't pass the Senate, if it even passes the House.
They haven't proposed anything that makes HC more affordable for patients, only less federal spending. Until they address the underlying costs of healthcare **, the rest of it is just rearranging the furniture to suit some, and not others.
There was a lot of rhetoric about encouraging competition (across state lines) and negotiating pharma prices - neither were mentioned in this first proposal. Supposedly that's to come later, but IMO attacking underlying costs of health care should come first - or at least as part of phase I.
**higher than any other developed country, and twice the average of all other developed countries
Basically, they're re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic by giving the First Class paasengers more deck chairs and locking all the Second and Third Class passengers in the brig! That's what Republicans do, why is anyone surprised?
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.
