Government Shutdown - September, 2025 Editiion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So they are trying for full year minibus bills?

https://www.reddit.com/r/fednews/comments/1o6u8pk/defense_appropriations_at_the_end_oftodays_senate/

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/10/14/congress/senate-gop-will-try-to-advance-three-bill-minibus-during-shutdown-00608418

Basically get republican friendly agencies funded. They are hoping to pull some democrats who want to see soldiers paid or have farmers in their state.

I thought regular appropriations bills cannot be filibustered. Why do they need 60 votes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

But the same dynamic happens no matter what. Cap one cost and providers then use a different code to make up the difference.

I agree with you about subsidies in theory but the biggest subsidy is using health care as a tax break for businesses but not individuals.

Obamacare built on the flawed system we have. It's one big innovation is the exchanges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

lol sure. MRI are prioritized by medical needs and are covered by insurance. If you want to get a private MRI it is $400-$1200. In the US an MRI is $400-$12,000 and wait times are long- 2-3 months.
Same with CT scans. It 6 weeks wait times with no emergency or urgent problems. If you want a private one in Canada it ranges from $192 to $490. In the US it is $250-$1200 and average time is 3.5 weeks though many places it is a lot longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

This is not what I've heard from my Canadian friends. They like their healthcare. They have access to the care they need -- every Canadian does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

lol sure. MRI are prioritized by medical needs and are covered by insurance. If you want to get a private MRI it is $400-$1200. In the US an MRI is $400-$12,000 and wait times are long- 2-3 months.
Same with CT scans. It 6 weeks wait times with no emergency or urgent problems. If you want a private one in Canada it ranges from $192 to $490. In the US it is $250-$1200 and average time is 3.5 weeks though many places it is a lot longer.

No wait times here. All covered by my health insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

Because the government controls the prices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

This is not what I've heard from my Canadian friends. They like their healthcare. They have access to the care they need -- every Canadian does.

My parents lived in Canada for a few years and have many friends still there. My mom still talks about how she wishes our system was like Canada's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After bragging about permanently cutting "Democrat programs," Trump says "we're not closing up Republican programs."

I wonder what he considers the ACA? Because there are certainly more red state republicans using it than anyone else in the country.

I get that. I as a republican are telling you to cut ACA off. What's so difficult about this?

You keep telling me it's red state heavy. I agree. NOW CUT IT OFF.

We have virtually no market forces anymore, it's a super rigged game and Wall Street is getting fat off of it.

Cut it off and, what, just let people die in the streets?

Of course. That's your answer to everything.

"If you don't give us what we want, people will die in the streets."

It's so trite.

the GOP has been baiting for more than a decade some magical replacement for the ACA. Where is it?

What is YOUR solution?

Why reach for a solution to an issue that has become a useful tool to divide the American people? Our logic doesn't fit into the agendas of our major political parties.

ACA was a massive and complex piece of legislation introduced to our health system. Such legislation requires regular maintenance and many updates in the early stages. Regular maintenance and necessary updates require a functional Congress. We don't have that and yes, the GOP is very much so more to blame for this legislation becoming stale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

This is not what I've heard from my Canadian friends. They like their healthcare. They have access to the care they need -- every Canadian does.

My parents lived in Canada for a few years and have many friends still there. My mom still talks about how she wishes our system was like Canada's.

Did she live there when she was young and healthy or as an older person who needed more medical care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

You can supplement with private insurance if you need to, but the system provides basic medical care for everyone. It’s not debatable, their system is better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

I wonder if this is because Canada has fewer medical personnel per capita compared to the USA; therefore, it is about availability and not cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

lol sure. MRI are prioritized by medical needs and are covered by insurance. If you want to get a private MRI it is $400-$1200. In the US an MRI is $400-$12,000 and wait times are long- 2-3 months.
Same with CT scans. It 6 weeks wait times with no emergency or urgent problems. If you want a private one in Canada it ranges from $192 to $490. In the US it is $250-$1200 and average time is 3.5 weeks though many places it is a lot longer.

A wait time (if is does exist as you report, which has been what my Canadian friends say) is better than no insurance/no care. This is what people like you miss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

lol sure. MRI are prioritized by medical needs and are covered by insurance. If you want to get a private MRI it is $400-$1200. In the US an MRI is $400-$12,000 and wait times are long- 2-3 months.
Same with CT scans. It 6 weeks wait times with no emergency or urgent problems. If you want a private one in Canada it ranges from $192 to $490. In the US it is $250-$1200 and average time is 3.5 weeks though many places it is a lot longer.

A wait time (if is does exist as you report, which has NOT been what my Canadian friends say) is better than no insurance/no care. This is what people like you miss.

My Canadian friends love their healthcare system and can’t understand how Americans can live with what we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

lol sure. MRI are prioritized by medical needs and are covered by insurance. If you want to get a private MRI it is $400-$1200. In the US an MRI is $400-$12,000 and wait times are long- 2-3 months.
Same with CT scans. It 6 weeks wait times with no emergency or urgent problems. If you want a private one in Canada it ranges from $192 to $490. In the US it is $250-$1200 and average time is 3.5 weeks though many places it is a lot longer.

No wait times here. All covered by my health insurance.

When was the last time you required a CT or MRI? I don’t believe you. It can take four to six months just to get an appointment with the OB-GYN for a Pap smear and I have Aetna PPO, one of the top health insurance plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACA was sold as reducing the cost of healthcare. Now costs have gone up and they want more and more subsidies to cover the premiums.
Of course some of the price increase is because of these same subsidies.

Look at what happened in education. Trump put a limit of $50,000 for student loans, and a college that was charging 65,000 now has lowered tuition to.... 50,000!

So what’s the answer? Huge portions of the country just don’t deserve healthcare? The current Congress is unable to solve the easiest problems these days so what’s the path forward?

Get government out and market forces in.

Competition between the states.

Drop the subsidies. The inherent pricing by insurance companies and medical establishments subsumes all subsidies and prices it right in to the service. So subsidies are like pure gravy to the industry.

If a procedure is $150 and the government tries to lower it by $50, the industry will just price the procedure at $200 (or more).

This is like a treadmill. You're on it and don't know how to get off. So all your answers are just raise the subsidy higher.

Why do insurance companies and medical establishments do this? It's a really simple answer: because they can.

Why doesn't it necessarily work that way in other developed countries with universal health care?

They replace it with rationing. Canada, which supposedly is the best socialized medicine, has wait times of over a year for MRI and CT. Many go to Seattle, Michigan, Vermont as an escape valve.

This is not what I've heard from my Canadian friends. They like their healthcare. They have access to the care they need -- every Canadian does.

+100