Government Shutdown - September, 2025 Editiion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

Yes yes. This is what the republicans were insisting on the whole time…lol! You maga types have no credibility. You did everything to stop or sabotage the ACA but did nothing and offered no alternatives.

Every republican I know over 50 is on ACA. Small businesses owners to consultant. They are getting hammered!

First, arguing that you can’t support the dissolution of a failed piece of policy because some republicans use it is just arguing in bad faith.

Second, democrats never allowed republicans into the room when they were writing Obamacare. It was passed on party lines, and as Pelosi herself said when pressed why Obamacare was being rammed down Americans’ throats with zero participation from the Republican Party, “We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2010/03/19/whats-in-the-bill-read-it-and-weep/). You can’t blame republicans for the failure that Obamacare has became.

The ACA / Obamacare was originally a Republican idea from Mitt Romney which was enacted in Massachusetts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform

So yes, Republicans created the first version of ACA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Government will reopen November 16th.

Your magic 8 ball came up with this? Provide more rationale/reasoning for your statement. I think it will be December before it reopens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

Yes yes. This is what the republicans were insisting on the whole time…lol! You maga types have no credibility. You did everything to stop or sabotage the ACA but did nothing and offered no alternatives.

Every republican I know over 50 is on ACA. Small businesses owners to consultant. They are getting hammered!

First, arguing that you can’t support the dissolution of a failed piece of policy because some republicans use it is just arguing in bad faith.

Second, democrats never allowed republicans into the room when they were writing Obamacare. It was passed on party lines, and as Pelosi herself said when pressed why Obamacare was being rammed down Americans’ throats with zero participation from the Republican Party, “We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2010/03/19/whats-in-the-bill-read-it-and-weep/). You can’t blame republicans for the failure that Obamacare has became.

The ACA / Obamacare was originally a Republican idea from Mitt Romney which was enacted in Massachusetts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform

So yes, Republicans created the first version of ACA.

And what's more, Republicans worked extensively with Democrats to create the bill - they just voted against it in order to create the false narrative that Democrats rammed it through without their input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

Yes yes. This is what the republicans were insisting on the whole time…lol! You maga types have no credibility. You did everything to stop or sabotage the ACA but did nothing and offered no alternatives.

Every republican I know over 50 is on ACA. Small businesses owners to consultant. They are getting hammered!

First, arguing that you can’t support the dissolution of a failed piece of policy because some republicans use it is just arguing in bad faith.

Second, democrats never allowed republicans into the room when they were writing Obamacare. It was passed on party lines, and as Pelosi herself said when pressed why Obamacare was being rammed down Americans’ throats with zero participation from the Republican Party, “We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2010/03/19/whats-in-the-bill-read-it-and-weep/). You can’t blame republicans for the failure that Obamacare has became.

This is a bogus, dishonest Republican talking point. They already had the bill language for MONTHS before the vote, they had numerous GOP staffers go over it line by line, they had extensive analyses and reports prepared, they had caucus and committee meetings to discuss it. Any Republican member of the House who claims they didn't know what was in it until the vote is either clueless, incompetent, or a liar.

[Anonymous]

Here's a question for Republicans:

ACA was signed into law in March 2010. That's over 15 years ago.

The Republicans have had more than 15 years to come up with a better option. Why haven't they? Why do they just complain about it incessantly, or try to kill it, when they don't have a viable alternative to replace it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

Yes yes. This is what the republicans were insisting on the whole time…lol! You maga types have no credibility. You did everything to stop or sabotage the ACA but did nothing and offered no alternatives.

Every republican I know over 50 is on ACA. Small businesses owners to consultant. They are getting hammered!

First, arguing that you can’t support the dissolution of a failed piece of policy because some republicans use it is just arguing in bad faith.

Second, democrats never allowed republicans into the room when they were writing Obamacare. It was passed on party lines, and as Pelosi herself said when pressed why Obamacare was being rammed down Americans’ throats with zero participation from the Republican Party, “We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2010/03/19/whats-in-the-bill-read-it-and-weep/). You can’t blame republicans for the failure that Obamacare has became.

Where's the Republican plan again? Please cite when it's been introduced into the House or Senate?

It's been 15 years and Republicans have never come up with any alternative to just turning back the clock. You have no credibility in this space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

This is complete insanity. It's also what insurance companies did to deny care for pre-existing conditions - if you will recall they denied care for congenital conditions, auto-immune issues, and they'd also tie any prior medical care you sought to your current condition in order to not pay for your care.

[Anonymous]

So will LAX move the needle to reopening??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

This is complete insanity. It's also what insurance companies did to deny care for pre-existing conditions - if you will recall they denied care for congenital conditions, auto-immune issues, and they'd also tie any prior medical care you sought to your current condition in order to not pay for your care.

They would have dropped my kid because of food allergies as a pre-existing condition. That is not fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

People tend to forget this part. Our healthcare system was a runaway train already It was a significant part of Obama's campaign from what I remember. People with pre-existing conditions had very few options short of hoping to hold on to their FT job with a big employer purely for insurance reasons or being married to someone with employer coverage. Even without pre-existing conditions insurance was sketchy, network coverage convoluted, you paid more as your deductible share than a cash patient and claims were often denied. I have experienced private insurance pre-Obama as a younger healthier adult and it already sucked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

Yes yes. This is what the republicans were insisting on the whole time…lol! You maga types have no credibility. You did everything to stop or sabotage the ACA but did nothing and offered no alternatives.

Every republican I know over 50 is on ACA. Small businesses owners to consultant. They are getting hammered!

First, arguing that you can’t support the dissolution of a failed piece of policy because some republicans use it is just arguing in bad faith.

Second, democrats never allowed republicans into the room when they were writing Obamacare. It was passed on party lines, and as Pelosi herself said when pressed why Obamacare was being rammed down Americans’ throats with zero participation from the Republican Party, “We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.” (https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2010/03/19/whats-in-the-bill-read-it-and-weep/). You can’t blame republicans for the failure that Obamacare has became.

The ACA / Obamacare was originally a Republican idea from Mitt Romney which was enacted in Massachusetts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform

So yes, Republicans created the first version of ACA.

Which is why the GOP has never had an answer to "replace" the ACA, because it was the republican health plan. Obama was tying to be bi-partisan but the GOP chose to fight it rather than adopt their own solution. In hindsight, Obama should have just passed Universal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

People tend to forget this part. Our healthcare system was a runaway train already It was a significant part of Obama's campaign from what I remember. People with pre-existing conditions had very few options short of hoping to hold on to their FT job with a big employer purely for insurance reasons or being married to someone with employer coverage. Even without pre-existing conditions insurance was sketchy, network coverage convoluted, you paid more as your deductible share than a cash patient and claims were often denied. I have experienced private insurance pre-Obama as a younger healthier adult and it already sucked.

Amazing how quickly people have forgotten the whole pre-existing conditions runaround that insurance companies used to refuse coverage.

I guess Obamacare has worked pretty well, despite the flaws. Too bad the GOP can’t see its way to proposing solutions.

But “idea of a concept of a plan” amirite?

[Anonymous]

So no discussion about LAX and the ATC staffing shortage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Like Elizabeth Warren said, we're stuck at the moment with a bleak choice between food or healthcare.

Food is required if you are poor and can't afford it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the government needs to subsidize Obamacare premiums for eternity for it to be viable, maybe we need to scrap it and go back to the private system.

It’s no excuse to hold the government hostage. If the dems want to address the subsidy crisis, they are more than welcome to introduce a bill repealing Obamacare and see where the dominoes fall.

I guess you don't remember the projections for price increases for all private insurance before Obamacare?

Obamacare didn't show up as nice thing to do. We had a crisis, and Obamacare helped ameliorate the pain.

Acting like Obamacare “fixed” a crisis is laughable.

Much of Obamacare was designed specifically to increase costs on consumers, not address spiraling premiums.

Forcing insurers to cover pre-existing medical conditions guaranteed spiraling costs. If the insurer has to cover the 550lb chain smoking alcoholic, then everyone pays. Forcing insurers to cover adult children under their parents’ policy means that you are forcing increased costs on the older generation to cover the costs of younger adults at prime working age.

This means Obamacare was always bound to require subsidy. Because it was never designed to achieve the goals it supposedly was intended to address.

The biggest problem is that there were proven, well established paths towards achieving these goals and lowering costs, which democrats refused to consider.

Focusing on the underlying cause of rising prices would have meant making moral compromises. It would have required acceptance that the biggest issue was not private enterprise, but rather an increasing unhealthy, sedentary population and over regulation.

Had they required deregulation, personalized medical consultations prior to approval of policies, and sliding prices depending on health and lifestyle would have drastically cut costs for most Americans, while encouraging smart choices. But it would mean that said 550lb chain smoking alcoholic would be paying an astronomical rate, and in the liberal mythos that would be considered ‘unfair’ despite the clear choices that led to such a predicament.

This is complete insanity. It's also what insurance companies did to deny care for pre-existing conditions - if you will recall they denied care for congenital conditions, auto-immune issues, and they'd also tie any prior medical care you sought to your current condition in order to not pay for your care.

They would have dropped my kid because of food allergies as a pre-existing condition. That is not fair.

Again that's not changing it's the temporary covid subsidies that are set to expire as they should have years ago