The tea partiers will not agree to small changes, they will say its just keeping Obamacare forever. I don’t see what the Reps can do that a) can pass and b) won’t be a political disaster for them. They promised what couldn’t be delivered for like 7 years and now they have the numbers theoretically to actually do it, but they just can’t. As Trump said, nobody knew this could be so complicated, (except for everyone that already knew that).
As CBO estimated for the House-passed American Health Care Act: under current law, a 64 year old making $26,500 a year would pay $1,700 for a health plan. Under the AHCA, the same plan for the same person would cost $14,600.
Meanwhile, a 21 year old making $68,200 under current law would pay $5,100 for the same health care plan. Under AHCA, he would pay $1,450.
If you think that nobody can question the morality of this policy change, I disagree.
If the Republican party considered these points, they could likely do this weird thing where they actually invited Democrats into the room and find a good deal of support there. Then, they could maybe all have an honest discussion around what’s the best way to move forward.
Of course, this not being an Aaron Sorkin show, that’s not what’s gonna happen.
The whole point is to do something not involving the Democrats, and benefiting their patrons. That’s the result of all these years of demonization and oppositionism. The fact that they cannot come up with anything themselves is something that should have been obvious even to their supporters for just as many years - right, adaher?
They can just blame the DemoncRats and the RINO’s. Which is already happening.
You probably shouldn’t change it THAT much, but I’m not sure you can call it moral to force young workers just starting out to pay 3 times more. And morality aside, you can’t make them pay 3 times more. That part of ACA has failed and there are only two ways forward: entice young people back into the market, or force them into the market with more draconian penalties.
You’re leaving single-payer out of the list. Wonder why.
These young people? Are we going to cut them a break on their student loan load so they can buy health insurance? You know, those kids who bought our bullshit about a college education being a ticket to the upper-middle class and now have to choose between intern and bicycle messenger.
No, they’ll just take their chances, won’t they? Because that’s what we would have done, or actually did.
And the people who aren’t very smart? Not smart enough to see the advantages of health insurance, no matter how patiently we explain it? They get sick, fuck 'em? Is being dumb a crime, or just a sin?
If they are our people, we should take care of them. And if they are not our people, who’s people are they?
I’m still not sure how you get from “old poor people should pay ten times more for health care (that they need more) than wealthy 21 year olds” to “morality directs that this is the only correct view.”
Hmm…why do you buy life insurance? It’s against the possibility of your dying before your time, or without ensuring that your family is provided for.
This isn’t a difficult concept. Barring violent death, whatever your age, you are highly likely to spend time in the hospital. What’s so immoral about paying for that possibility just as you would life insurance? (Except that with health insurance, you get benefits far earlier than your termination or hospitalization…preventive care and other health maintenance.)
Unfortunately, the entire thing ignores the elephant in the room, which is Big Pharma. (Other industries secondarily, but it’s mainly them.) Cost control is the solution, but there’s no way Republicans would ever go for that.
Okay. Now that we’re here, how do we ensure that people who need healthcare the most - people with expensive, chronic, life-threatening conditions like cancer patients, for example - can get health care? The whole point of the individual mandate is to ensure that everyone pitches in, so that those who need more can get more without being gouged to hell and back. You know, those incredibly popular parts of the law, the group rating and the inability to deny people based on pre-existing conditions?
The modern conservative view does not seem to recognize the word “our”. There is no community, no sense of shared obligations that go along with shared rights; just a jungle filled with individuals. That’s how you can justify opposing health care as being a community right and responsibility. That’s how you avoid understanding what insurance even is.
There’s a “we,” but it only applies to rich people. And there aren’t any other ***people ***at all. Not that “we” need to bother with.
So how did Fox cover the McConnell anti-health bill? They aren’t.
Best T-shirt: “Trumpcare - It’s Like Trump University But You Die”
The trouble is the premiums and decidable for the middle class are way too high. Corporations didn’t like Obama care. It was essentially an act where everybody else paid for the poor, but it was a forced act done without any political cooperation from the other side.
Fix that first. Come up with a plan the middle class can afford, then come up with a plan for the poor, of frequently ill where the states can set their own insurance.
Yet somehow Obamacare has approval ratings half again those of your President. A majority approve of it, unlike him. How did that work out (aside from his being deeply unpopular)?
Just out of curiosity, have you checked out what corporations think about the current republican health care plan?
There’s a lot more wrong with this post, but this just sprung out at me as trivially hilarious.
I got me this one.
“You called Terry an asshole. Now you are dead from dissin’ Terry.”
Obamacare was a disaster from day one. It needs to be repealed in its entirety and the government needs to keep its paws off of insurance.