U.S. Politics

[AlioTheFool]

I know proponents of Obamacare like to throw that number around, but that was the main point of the tax penalty for not having insurance. The mandate artificially increases the number of insured so those people who would otherwise opt out essentially had to get insurance. Now does that mean all 20 million are in that category? No, but a good majority are. Some people would rather have the extra cash. It's an obvious risk, but having a government mandate isn't cool.

The problem is, the people who will opt will be the healthy (usually young). Those are the people who support the system. That's how all insurance works, those who don't collect support those who do.

Removing the mandate (which I completely despised when it was originally introduced) will make premiums/deductibles far more expensive for those who can least afford them (the older and the sick). It takes health insurance away from people. If not directly (as in the removal of pre-existing condition protection), at least effectively.

[Tommy]

The problem is, the people who will opt will be the healthy (usually young). Those are the people who support the system. That's how all insurance works, those who don't collect support those who do.

Removing the mandate (which I completely despised when it was originally introduced) will make premiums/deductibles far more expensive for those who can least afford them (the older and the sick). It takes health insurance away from people. If not directly (as in the removal of pre-existing condition protection), at least effectively.

Well then how do you explain the rising premiums even with the mandate?

[AlioTheFool]

Well then how do you explain the rising premiums even with the mandate?

The greed of the health insurance providers?

Come on Tommy. I predicted exorbitant rising of premiums before the ACA ever made it into law. It wasn't hard to see it coming that the insurance companies would capitalize on the situation by pointing the finger at being forced to cover the "uninsurable." And that's exactly what they did.

Every other insurance industry works under the idea that those who don't collect subsidize those that do. Why do the healthcare insurers get to act like they're somehow different? That's how the argument for single-payer picks up legitimate steam.

[Tommy]

The greed of the health insurance providers?

Come on Tommy. I predicted exorbitant rising of premiums before the ACA ever made it into law. It wasn't hard to see it coming that the insurance companies would capitalize on the situation by pointing the finger at being forced to cover the "uninsurable." And that's exactly what they did.

Every other insurance industry works under the idea that those who don't collect subsidize those that do. Why do the healthcare insurers get to act like they're somehow different? That's how the argument for single-payer picks up legitimate steam.

That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.

[Badger]

That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.

Because they're pretty clearly not improving it. At this point you can only debate whether this is a step back or standing pat. That's also how you can point out the liberals (millions will die!) and the true conservatives (this is just as bad as the ACA!).

[AlioTheFool]

That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.

I've never thought the ACA was a good plan, so you'll get no argument from me there.

But the elimination of the mandate (especially coupled with the bonus of providers now being able to charge 5 times the premium, rather than 3) is almost as bad as removing the mandate to cover pre-existing conditions. Both exacerbate the same problem: making insurance coverage more expensive to those who can least afford it.

[Fenwyr]

I know proponents of Obamacare like to throw that number around, but that was the main point of the tax penalty for not having insurance. The mandate artificially increases the number of insured so those people who would otherwise opt out essentially had to get insurance. Now does that mean all 20 million are in that category? No, but a good majority are. Some people would rather have the extra cash. It's an obvious risk, but having a government mandate isn't cool.

The vast majority of the people losing insurance will be poor and/or old due to the medicaid rollback.

The mandate issue is BS.  Most young people are either on their parents plan, were already insured because most universities already required it, get insurance through work, or just said freak it and paid the penalty.

Its a shame the mandate was included in the ACA, because it accomplised nothing but offer a talking point to the republican echo chamber.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Johnny English]

I'm putting this here because Fox.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/324399-sean-hannity-pointed-gun-at-juan-williams-report

My feelings about personal firearm ownership are well known, and even I know that the first two rules of firearms are:

1. Assume that every firearm is loaded

2. Never point a firearm at anything you don't intend to shoot

So don't you freaking dare trot out how freaking qualified he is to own a gun when he pulls excrement like this.

[Badger]

[Fenwyr]

Funny and obviously not a real quote, but Ayn Rand's rotting corpse can DIAFF.  I have no idea why libertarians tie themselves to her.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Badger]

Funny and obviously not a real quote, but Ayn Rand's rotting corpse can DIAFF.  I have no idea why libertarians tie themselves to her.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I actually own a few of her books and old copies of her periodical The Objectivist. I get the appeal of libertarianism but it's possible to wake up and realize it may not be in ones own best interest. And acting in your own interests is the whole point of her philosphy.

[Fenwyr]

I actually own a few of her books and old copies of her periodical The Objectivist. I get the appeal of libertarianism but it's possible to wake up and realize it may not be in ones own best interest. And acting in your own interests is the whole point of her philosphy.

That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else.  For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[MBGreen]

That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else. For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

like Batman

[Fenwyr]

like Batman

I only wish I could be so cool.

But in similar fashion, I would have blown my billions for sure.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Fenwyr]

If you have the day off, the Russia hearing is interesting.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk