Update for Race
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/20/politics/three-bucket-health-care/index.html
Comments
-
I wonder when a republican will stand up for their constituents and say they won't vote for a bill that reduces the number of insured people in their district.
-
What about the other promises to not reduce the number of insured.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer warned Republicans who oppose the proposed health care bill to expect to “pay a price at home” in the event the bill fails.
"I think there's going to be a price to be paid,” Spicer said to ABC News' Jon Karl at today's White House press briefing.
"The president was really clear. He laid it all on the lines for everybody. We made a promise ... if we keep our promise, people will reward us. If we don't keep our promise, it will be hard to manage this," House Speaker Paul Ryan said this morning.
https://gma.yahoo.com/republicans-vote-against-health-care-bill-could-pay-232504443--abc-news-topstories.html -
He made a promise to cover everyone at a lower cost
-
And?
-
RaceBannon said:
And?
-
Trump specifically mentioned the words "cheaper" and "everyone"...the current proposal does the opposite.RaceBannon said:And?
Care to comment? -
trump is keeping all of his promises. everybody says soThomasFremont said:
Trump specifically mentioned the words "cheaper" and "everyone"...the current proposal does the opposite.RaceBannon said:And?
Care to comment? -
I heard he's doing exactly what he'd say he'd do.dhdawg said:
trump is keeping all of his promises. everybody says soThomasFremont said:
Trump specifically mentioned the words "cheaper" and "everyone"...the current proposal does the opposite.RaceBannon said:And?
Care to comment? -
Obvious promise keeper is obvious.dhdawg said:
trump is keeping all of his promises. everybody says soThomasFremont said:
Trump specifically mentioned the words "cheaper" and "everyone"...the current proposal does the opposite.RaceBannon said:And?
Care to comment? -
And?
-
-
This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever read. Good Lord in the late 60's and 70's the butt hole was a fancy feast. Who is anybody to think butt fucking is on the upswing. Every couple, except More_cock and his wife, have made woopie in the butt Bob. People are people.
Cavemen and the bitches they drug into the caves were pioneering the buttsex and liking it. The ring sting is nothing new. Why does this new generation think they are new to everything. Get in the back of the fucking line with the bleeding rectum bitch. It's all been done before. Sheesh me and my buddies all put the poundin to the roundin back in the day. Some clean, some poopy, some bloody. But unlike the porns chick's don't choke on the red/brown cocksicle after the act. It's right to the sink for a wet rag and some soap and water. -
There is a whole lot a stupid in this discussion.
Simple math says you can't both cover the same amount of people and give people the option not to be forced to buy insurance. By definition, not forcing people to buy something will reduce the amount of people using it. And long term insurance rates do go down...the only way to get short-term rates to go down as people are not longer forced to buy insurance is to throw more money at the problem (which doesn't fix anything).
Its a stupid argument for the Republicans to get into though...they should just leave Obamacare alone and watch it go up in flames. As it is Obamacare is not sustainable, so comparing anything to someone projected wet dream of it is a exercise of mental masturbation. Cap spending on it (i.e. don't transfer money to the insurance companies)...Obama did most of the rest of killing it with the postponement of the Cadillac tax (2020 now?), hardship rules, etc. Hell...make it easier to get a waver on having to have it and it will really blow up. Give it a year or two pointing at it and the Dems as owning the monstrosity until everyone hates it and then offer up an alternative.
The only thing I can think of why they aren't doing this is that they are worried its going to hurt the overall economy. -
HoustonHusky said:
There is a whole lot a stupid in this discussion.
Simple math says you can't both cover the same amount of people and give people the option not to be forced to buy insurance. By definition, not forcing people to buy something will reduce the amount of people using it. And long term insurance rates do go down...the only way to get short-term rates to go down as people are not longer forced to buy insurance is to throw more money at the problem (which doesn't fix anything).
Its a stupid argument for the Republicans to get into though...they should just leave Obamacare alone and watch it go up in flames. As it is Obamacare is not sustainable, so comparing anything to someone projected wet dream of it is a exercise of mental masturbation. Cap spending on it (i.e. don't transfer money to the insurance companies)...Obama did most of the rest of killing it with the postponement of the Cadillac tax (2020 now?), hardship rules, etc. Hell...make it easier to get a waver on having to have it and it will really blow up. Give it a year or two pointing at it and the Dems as owning the monstrosity until everyone hates it and then offer up an alternative.
The only thing I can think of why they aren't doing this is that they are worried its going to hurt the overall economy.
-
I'm just glad you finally called Trump stupid.HoustonHusky said:There is a whole lot a stupid in this discussion.
Simple math says you can't both cover the same amount of people and give people the option not to be forced to buy insurance. By definition, not forcing people to buy something will reduce the amount of people using it. And long term insurance rates do go down...the only way to get short-term rates to go down as people are not longer forced to buy insurance is to throw more money at the problem (which doesn't fix anything).
Its a stupid argument for the Republicans to get into though...they should just leave Obamacare alone and watch it go up in flames. As it is Obamacare is not sustainable, so comparing anything to someone projected wet dream of it is a exercise of mental masturbation. Cap spending on it (i.e. don't transfer money to the insurance companies)...Obama did most of the rest of killing it with the postponement of the Cadillac tax (2020 now?), hardship rules, etc. Hell...make it easier to get a waver on having to have it and it will really blow up. Give it a year or two pointing at it and the Dems as owning the monstrosity until everyone hates it and then offer up an alternative.
The only thing I can think of why they aren't doing this is that they are worried its going to hurt the overall economy. -
Oh, like 2012-2017?HoustonHusky said:There is a whole lot a stupid in this discussion.
Simple math says you can't both cover the same amount of people and give people the option not to be forced to buy insurance. By definition, not forcing people to buy something will reduce the amount of people using it. And long term insurance rates do go down...the only way to get short-term rates to go down as people are not longer forced to buy insurance is to throw more money at the problem (which doesn't fix anything).
Its a stupid argument for the Republicans to get into though...they should just leave Obamacare alone and watch it go up in flames. As it is Obamacare is not sustainable, so comparing anything to someone projected wet dream of it is a exercise of mental masturbation. Cap spending on it (i.e. don't transfer money to the insurance companies)...Obama did most of the rest of killing it with the postponement of the Cadillac tax (2020 now?), hardship rules, etc. Hell...make it easier to get a waver on having to have it and it will really blow up. Give it a year or two pointing at it and the Dems as owning the monstrosity until everyone hates it and then offer up an alternative.
The only thing I can think of why they aren't doing this is that they are worried its going to hurt the overall economy. -
Conservatives want free market solutions focused on care of patient, not the insurance companies. Democrats like Obama, Ryan, Pelosi, and Schumer are focused on how the Government can control healthcare delivery via taxation and coverage mandates.2001400ex said:I wonder when a republican will stand up for their constituents and say they won't vote for a bill that reduces the number of insured people in their district.
People know the difference. -
I want to hear your thoughts on why you think Obamacare is not sustainable.HoustonHusky said:There is a whole lot a stupid in this discussion.
Simple math says you can't both cover the same amount of people and give people the option not to be forced to buy insurance. By definition, not forcing people to buy something will reduce the amount of people using it. And long term insurance rates do go down...the only way to get short-term rates to go down as people are not longer forced to buy insurance is to throw more money at the problem (which doesn't fix anything).
Its a stupid argument for the Republicans to get into though...they should just leave Obamacare alone and watch it go up in flames. As it is Obamacare is not sustainable, so comparing anything to someone projected wet dream of it is a exercise of mental masturbation. Cap spending on it (i.e. don't transfer money to the insurance companies)...Obama did most of the rest of killing it with the postponement of the Cadillac tax (2020 now?), hardship rules, etc. Hell...make it easier to get a waver on having to have it and it will really blow up. Give it a year or two pointing at it and the Dems as owning the monstrosity until everyone hates it and then offer up an alternative.
The only thing I can think of why they aren't doing this is that they are worried its going to hurt the overall economy. -
simple maff
-
I'm stupid so why don't you drop the equation here.doogie said:simple maff
-
Even the democrats know Obamacare is dead hondo. You can stop sucking Obama's dick now
-
I just want you to explain the reasons why.RaceBannon said:Even the democrats know Obamacare is dead hondo. You can stop sucking Obama's dick now
-
Premiums way up over estimations, number of insurers participating keep dropping each year, something like 17 of the 23 co-ops set up have already failed, most of the state exchanges are on life support with Federal grants (I think 5 have already closed), etc. etc. On top of that several of the subsidies expire this year, which will make it worse. It is a long laundry list.2001400ex said:
I just want you to explain the reasons why.RaceBannon said:Even the democrats know Obamacare is dead hondo. You can stop sucking Obama's dick now
As a result the number of people participating in the exchanges is WAY below projections (while Medicaid people are up...which is why Dems think it is a "success"). Close out the (illegal) gift payments Obama tried and did from the govt to the insurance companies and it will just accelerate the collapse.
Best thing Repubs could do is barely not pass a fix and the next day focus on taxes and start pointing each and every day at Democrats saying every single Democrat voted against a fix...repeat over and over that they passed the failing law and and they refused to fix it.
Worse thing they could do is force through a probable improvement that still isn't great and somehow then get blamed for it all. -
-
At least I got you to agree you're stupid (
-
-
Ok. So next question. How will this bill fix any of those issues?HoustonHusky said:
Premiums way up over estimations, number of insurers participating keep dropping each year, something like 17 of the 23 co-ops set up have already failed, most of the state exchanges are on life support with Federal grants (I think 5 have already closed), etc. etc. On top of that several of the subsidies expire this year, which will make it worse. It is a long laundry list.2001400ex said:
I just want you to explain the reasons why.RaceBannon said:Even the democrats know Obamacare is dead hondo. You can stop sucking Obama's dick now
As a result the number of people participating in the exchanges is WAY below projections (while Medicaid people are up...which is why Dems think it is a "success"). Close out the (illegal) gift payments Obama tried and did from the govt to the insurance companies and it will just accelerate the collapse.
Best thing Repubs could do is barely not pass a fix and the next day focus on taxes and start pointing each and every day at Democrats saying every single Democrat voted against a fix...repeat over and over that they passed the failing law and and they refused to fix it.
Worse thing they could do is force through a probable improvement that still isn't great and somehow then get blamed for it all. -
To be factual, there's been like 40 changes to the bill since it was passed. This comment is ridiculously false.HoustonHusky said:
Premiums way up over estimations, number of insurers participating keep dropping each year, something like 17 of the 23 co-ops set up have already failed, most of the state exchanges are on life support with Federal grants (I think 5 have already closed), etc. etc. On top of that several of the subsidies expire this year, which will make it worse. It is a long laundry list.2001400ex said:
I just want you to explain the reasons why.RaceBannon said:Even the democrats know Obamacare is dead hondo. You can stop sucking Obama's dick now
As a result the number of people participating in the exchanges is WAY below projections (while Medicaid people are up...which is why Dems think it is a "success"). Close out the (illegal) gift payments Obama tried and did from the govt to the insurance companies and it will just accelerate the collapse.
Best thing Repubs could do is barely not pass a fix and the next day focus on taxes and start pointing each and every day at Democrats saying every single Democrat voted against a fix...repeat over and over that they passed the failing law and and they refused to fix it.
Worse thing they could do is force through a probable improvement that still isn't great and somehow then get blamed for it all. -
Yet it's still failing fatally
-
Explain how.doogie said:Yet it's still failing fatally
