Anonymous wrote:There are no plans for something better, just something worse, always.

Concepts of a plan of something worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

Why is that my problem? I pay for myself and that's it. I don't burden you and you don't burden me.

Enough with socializing every "human right" across the masses.

So you’re completely unfamiliar with the concept of insurance. Any type of insurance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

I never understood why he did not just expand Medicare to those with pre-existing conditions. People with disabilities already get Medicare and social security. Diabetes, cancer, and a host of other pre-existing conditions can be reasonably listed as disabilities or conditions requiring public insurance separate from private industry. There's a reason Medicare covers the elderly because they need more procedures and things like nursing homes. Such a step would've been a win win: insurance companies would save money on underwriting the sick, and it would be a stepping stone to Medicare for all.

Upending the private system to subsidize those with conditions just made insurance companies place that cost burden on everyone else which means higher premiums and deductibles. Socialism and capitalism are at odds with each other

Yes, and medicare and social security are going broke.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

I never understood why he did not just expand Medicare to those with pre-existing conditions. People with disabilities already get Medicare and social security. Diabetes, cancer, and a host of other pre-existing conditions can be reasonably listed as disabilities or conditions requiring public insurance separate from private industry. There's a reason Medicare covers the elderly because they need more procedures and things like nursing homes. Such a step would've been a win win: insurance companies would save money on underwriting the sick, and it would be a stepping stone to Medicare for all.

Upending the private system to subsidize those with conditions just made insurance companies place that cost burden on everyone else which means higher premiums and deductibles. Socialism and capitalism are at odds with each other

Anonymous wrote:You'll have to wait until mid 2017, the date when Trump has promised to repeal and replace ACA.

Exactly. It’s like these posters never read a newspaper. SMDH.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

Why is that my problem? I pay for myself and that's it. I don't burden you and you don't burden me.

Enough with socializing every "human right" across the masses.

Why is the cr@p you want my problem?

I know you get something from this government. People who don't need aren't wasting time in this site.

Well i don't want to give it to you. Why are your problems my problems?

Why are the blue states turning in tax dollars for the red state grifters. Let them starve.

Agree. Next time there’s a hurricane or a tornado and red states are torn apart, let them figure it out. Need money? Up your income taxes. Not my problem. I want my money going toward strong public schools, healthcare, improving public transportation, improving access to services for the impoverished, and improving infrastructure here. I do not want to fund foreign wars. I do not want my money going to states that refuse to adequately tax their citizens and then look to us for handouts. Sorry!

Obamacare (aka the ACA) has been slowly expanding despite Republican efforts to repeal it. How? Through Medicaid expansion, that’s how.

Here’s an article with more info:

https://www.kff.org/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions/

There are no plans for something better, just something worse, always.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

Why is that my problem? I pay for myself and that's it. I don't burden you and you don't burden me.

Enough with socializing every "human right" across the masses.

Why is the cr@p you want my problem?

I know you get something from this government. People who don't need aren't wasting time in this site.

Well i don't want to give it to you. Why are your problems my problems?

Why are the blue states turning in tax dollars for the red state grifters. Let them starve.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Are you sure that you understand how insurance works? Even if you’re paying completely out of pocket for yourself and your family, in a “good” year you will be paying to help cover the costs of care for complete strangers. In a less good year , or even a catastrophic one, complete strangers will be helping to pay for the costs of the care that you and your family members need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

You do realize that the definition of “insurance” is that you pay into a pool that benefits both you and complete strangers? Or are you really that stupid?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.

Why is that my problem? I pay for myself and that's it. I don't burden you and you don't burden me.

Enough with socializing every "human right" across the masses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what happen with repealing Obama care?

I know they will release Trump health care plan soon, but haven't seen anything yet. Anything when either will happen? We only need 50 votes to repeal it so why aren't they voting?

Trump and the republicans are defunding ACA. So it will cost a lot more and offer a lot less. This will effectively kill it.

So no repeal. Death by a thousand cuts, increase paperwork, increase eligibility rules, increase bureaucracy, etc and no replacement. The good news is it will take affect after the midterms. This will allow Fox and the Republicans to blame democrats!

My Trumper relative has a disease that makes her ineligible for regular health insurance. She depends on Obamacare, although she denies the ACA is Obamacare. She's going to have a terrible time finding health insurance after the president she voted for destroys her health insurance, which will deny her access to the health care she needs. I've explained this to her, but she doesn't believe it. It's almost Darwinian, I guess. The true Trumper believers are digging their own graves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they should produce “something better” before they repeal what we’ve got. I agree that Obamacare is far from perfect, but I think any program this large, produced by a government bureaucracy, will inherently have problems.

Meanwhile, do you remember what healthcare was like before Obamacare? If you had Healthcare at all (and many had no way to get it), you could still be refused coverage for pre-existing conditions or if you exceeded your lifetime maximum.

I’m all for something better, but Trump has been promising that since his first campaign and has yet to reveal it. Meanwhile, something is better than nothing, so simply repealing what we’ve got would be something worse.

Polls show that they were happier with their insurance and its cost pre Obamacare than they are now.

Pp you responded to,

Which polls? By who? Polls are hardly conclusive, being easily manipulated.

Personally (as a poll with a sample size of one), I think Obamacare was a HUGE step forward. I do think it should be upgraded with “something better”, but I suspect my idea of something better may differ significantly from yours. I would like to see universal healthcare with the government as the single payer. Additionally, I’d like the government to start busting monopolies, cracking down on price gouging, and reigning in other exploitive corporate practices. I think if the government funds medical research, it should be reflected in the patent rights. I think in no case should American companies be allowed to charge Americans more for healthcare that their taxes helped develop than they charge foreign patients.

Regardless of whether the current system of Obamacare is eventually replaced with my idea of something better, your idea of something better, or the ultimate paragon of insurance perfection which is so ideal that neither of us can begin to imagine it, I don’t think the current system (which we both agree is flawed) should be revoked until we have something at least as good ready to seamlessly replace it with. With a population as large as America’s, there is a constant need for healthcare. Any gap in coverage, however brief could mean utter disaster for countless Americans, both medically and financially. Lives will be lost or damaged while families are faced with crippling debt that still may not cover care necessary to save their loved ones.

If you want Trump to replace it, fine. I honestly hope Trump’s version succeeds beyond your wildest imagination, regardless of how different it may be from my preferences. If his system is a rousing success, that will be good for America as a country and for individual Americans. I would like nothing more than to be proven wrong by having lives saved and individuals able to live healthier lives. I’m rooting for it, and if you Trump can pull it off, I’ll gladly give you, Trump, and the entire MAGA movement the credit for it. Just do it in a logical sequence that doesn’t wreak havoc in the process.

While I’m a never-Trumper who thinks MAGA is a cult, I will give credit where credit is due. I credit Trump’s Operation Warp Speed with developing the COVID vaccine in a short timeframe that was unprecedented in human history, saving millions of lives. I think it is tragic that political forces have been able to cast aspersions on and restrict access to his greatest achievement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The something better is called single payer or universal.

Going back to what the US had with exclusions for pre-existing conditions would be a nightmare.

Yes, imagine that. People who work for a living would be paying for themselves and their family only and wouldn't be paying two and a half times in premiums as they do now after Obamacare to foot the bill for complete strangers.

Or imagine like pre ACA your family couldn't be insured due to a pre existing condition or paying 3x what you pay now for really limited coverage (no maternity, no hospital) because that was very common pre ACA.