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.
Think of insurance coverage like police protection. We all pay, although only some of us have never ever had to call for police assistance and likely never will.
Bingo.
Also, we mandate insurance for our vehicles, but not for human lives. It's insane.
First off its Obama care not Trump care. The difference is that you will not be FORCED to buy it. Millions will choose not to purchase health insurance. If premiums go up then so be it. In fact for millions of people a catastrophic plan would be more than fine.
Actually that is what makes it Trumpcare. Having everyone join the risk pool and everyone expanding medicaid was what Obamacare premium rates were based on. The states that wouldn't cooperate guaranteed that the premiums would not be affordable.
Trump now OWNs it. His actions have consequences. For once the GOP will have to take personal responsibility for a policy.
Looks like he has a great healthcare plan. Actually the interesting thing thats pointed out is that this will impact those making 4X the poverty limit, as the subsidies will shelter the poorer folks.
2019 will be the first time we see the impacts of the war on the ACA. Will it really be 30% as the study estimates? Barring some changes I can see that occurring.
Of course rates will go up under Trump. He did everything in his power to make sure few people would sign up for the ACA by shortening the sign up time period; refusing to provide information as to what the time period was; killing the mandate.
The less people insured (including seemingly healthy people) ~ the higher the rates go.
Trump promised us HEALTHCARE FOR EVERYONE and it was going to be immediate and EASY. He failed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
It's TrumpCare now. You break it, you bought it.
If you are actually a retired cop, you enjoyed decades of decent health insurance paid for by taxpayers.
Apparently, we are still footing the bill or perhaps your wife is. Hard to tell from your post.
As long as insurance companies can't discriminate against those with pre-existing conditions, those with catastrophic insurance should be okay. If they find themselves needing regular insurance coverage, they can always switch.
However, if insurance companies can refuse those with pre-existing conditions, then those with catastrophic coverage will find themselves in a more difficult situation.
If insurance companies are not allowed by law to refuse those with pre-existing conditions, then we all pay higher premiums to cover the cost of those who were coasting along until something came up.
And we will all pay higher premiums to pay for those with no insurance who now have no other choice but to go to the emergency room for care. The most expensive care. As will our taxpayer dollars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
Actually, first off it's Trump's utter failure to make good on his promise to replace Obamacare with something far better immediately upon taking office.
Just another lie. And Mexico will pay for it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
Personally, I think we should go back to the rules we had before.
Insurance companies can go back to refusing to insure anyone with a pre-existing condition.
Insurance companies could set caps on annual and lifetime limits.
Parents can no longer keep their children covered under their insurance until 26.
...
The only thing I would change is that Emergency Rooms are not required to treat those without paid up insurance. You make the choice to go without insurance, then tough tomatoes. You pay the price.
It's a dog eat dog world.
No reason for my taxes or my health insurance premiums being jacked up for those who can't manage their own affairs.
A whole lotta Trumpies would be out of luck in those poor red states. Oh well. You get what you vote for.
Republicans own something they all voted against? lmao ....
yeah I know, libs don't want to be associated with Obamacare anymore, it failed miserably, but no one forgets who created it and supported it .......no one..
Republicans own something they all voted against? lmao ....
yeah I know, libs don't want to be associated with Obamacare anymore, it failed miserably, but no one forgets who created it and supported it .......no one..
And yet Republicans have tried to repeal it over a dozen times.
And yet Obamacare is still going strong.
The people have spoken. Too bad Republicans continue to play deaf.
If you are actually a retired cop, you enjoyed decades of decent health insurance paid for by taxpayers.
Apparently, we are still footing the bill or perhaps your wife is. Hard to tell from your post.
As long as insurance companies can't discriminate against those with pre-existing conditions, those with catastrophic insurance should be okay. If they find themselves needing regular insurance coverage, they can always switch.
However, if insurance companies can refuse those with pre-existing conditions, then those with catastrophic coverage will find themselves in a more difficult situation.
If insurance companies are not allowed by law to refuse those with pre-existing conditions, then we all pay higher premiums to cover the cost of those who were coasting along until something came up.
Wrong. It's still the Democrat's "Obamacare," and until some solution to the failed plan is agreed upon (hopefully, free market ...get the government out of my healthcare), it will always be "Obamacare."
Pumpkin Head Owns it.
He could have repealed it but instead sided with the Insurance and Pharma Lobbyists.
No, he couldn't have repealed it. The President has no power to repeal any law passed by Congress. Read the Constitution. Only Obama went around Congress and "legislated" (DACA).
Wrong. It's still the Democrat's "Obamacare," and until some solution to the failed plan is agreed upon (hopefully, free market ...get the government out of my healthcare), it will always be "Obamacare."
Well, to be precise, it was actually Heritage foundation's healthcare, you know with mandate and everything. Now, without the mandate it is something else.
Interestingly enough, as I mentioned in another thread: in (RED) Texas almost the same number of people signed up for ACA as last year. That's despite twice shorter enrollment period, cut funds for advertisement, and the rest of the continuous sabotage.
Free market does not work for healthcare. You can walk away from the new iphone if you don't like the cost, but highly likely you are not going to walk away from cancer treatment without which you die.
Looks like he has a great healthcare plan. Actually the interesting thing thats pointed out is that this will impact those making 4X the poverty limit, as the subsidies will shelter the poorer folks.
2019 will be the first time we see the impacts of the war on the ACA. Will it really be 30% as the study estimates? Barring some changes I can see that occurring.
Wrong. It's still the Democrat's "Obamacare," and until some solution to the failed plan is agreed upon (hopefully, free market ...get the government out of my healthcare), it will always be "Obamacare."
It becomes less and less Democrat's Obamacare when parts of the law are chipped away.
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.
