Utopia Talk / Politics / McCain Votes No on Skinny Repeal

chuck rank	Fri Jul 28 07:46:11 2017 http://the...y-backup-obamacare-repeal-plan Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) killed the last-resort Senate Republican healthcare bill in a surprise vote early Friday morning, voting against a pared-down proposal that GOP leaders released only hours earlier. Voting shortly after midnight, McCain who returned to the Senate on Tuesday after undergoing emergency surgery related to brain cancer, joined GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) in opposing the measure that would have repealed key parts of ObamaCare. McCain cast the "no" vote two days after a dramatic return to the Senate floor during which he called on his colleagues to work together on major issues such as healthcare reform, which has long been a Senate tradition until the upsurge of partisanship in recent years. McCain has emerged this year as one of President Trump’s most outspoken critics in Congress and the late-night vote cements his status as a maverick, a role he relished earlier in his career when President George W. Bush occupied the White House. The bare-bones proposal, dubbed the “skinny” repeal because it left untouched big sections of ObamaCare, would have resulted in 16 more million people being without insurance in a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO also estimated that it would increase premiums by 20 percent compared to current law. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) pushed it as a backup proposal after Republicans failed to agree on a bigger repeal that repealed and replaced the pillars of ObamaCare or a repeal-only measure that passed both chambers in 2015. Many Republican senators did not support the substance of the legislation but decided to vote for it as a way to prolong the healthcare negotiation by setting up a conference negotiation with the House. Vice President Pence was spotted lobbying McCain on the Senate floor shortly before the crucial vote. He also worked on Collins while other GOP leaders focused on Murkowski. But those efforts fell short. McCain was never a big fan of the Senate healthcare reform effort, which would have cut billions of dollars in Medicaid funding for his home state of Arizona, which was one of 30 states that expanded enrollment under ObamaCare. He raised Republican suspicions and Democratic hopes shortly before the historic vote when he declined to tell reporters how he would vote on the latest idea from the GOP leadership, the skinny repeal. One Republican leadership source predicted earlier in the day that it had a “nine out of 10” chance of passing. But McCain’s defection became apparent when he began huddling with Democrats on the Senate floor. He complained earlier this month after Senate GOP leaders left out three Medicaid-related amendments that Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) asked to be included in the bill. McCain joined GOP Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and David Perdue (Ga.) at a press conference a few hours before the vote in which they asked for assurances from GOP leaders that the “skinny” bill would be revised substantially in a conference negotiation with the House. GOP senators worried there was a chance that House Republicans might simply have approved the Senate legislation without further changes, in which case senators wouldn’t have had the chance to approve it again before becoming law.
Forwyn rank	Fri Jul 28 07:56:20 2017 Die already.
Aeros rank	Fri Jul 28 07:59:21 2017 Divine intervention. Only explanation. McCaine is a dead man walking, answerable only to God. He will die, but not soon enough for Trump.
Paramount rank	Fri Jul 28 09:03:44 2017 http://twitter.com/theperezhilton/status/890822591664889856
Paramount rank	Fri Jul 28 09:05:02 2017 Trump and his administration is imploding.
Dukhat rank	Fri Jul 28 09:16:04 2017 Ah yes the false outrage and hatred of McCain based off his support of Interventionist foreign policy ... the kind that virtually every Republican ever has supported (aside from Ron Paul and Rand Paul). Too bad McCain didn't win the primary in 2000. He would've been a great president. Just watching far right retards fume would've been enough and probably no Iraq war either.
chen rank	Fri Jul 28 11:36:08 2017 Heh, interesting development after his vote earlier in the week. I'm surprised they got enough support for this stupid plan to even be close. The GOP was looking to pass a plan that they knew was going to suck just to somehow hash out differences with more people involved. Guess the only ones who could see the utter retardation were a dying man and 2 women.
hood rank	Fri Jul 28 14:28:17 2017 It needs to be made very clear that you can't "let it implode" if you've gone around defunding various parts of the legislation. Don't let Trump create the narrative. Let reality be your guide.
Forwyn rank	Fri Jul 28 15:22:11 2017 "based off his support of Interventionist foreign policy" And that outside of his foreign policy, he is a meaningless panderer. He's nothing but a beltway status-quo politician, that always deflects his criticisms with MUH SERVICE. "He would've been a great president." Not only would he have started the wars we had, we likely would have been at war with Russia over Georgia in 2008. "watching far right retards fume" Libbies would suddenly hate war again. "probably no Iraq war either." McCain (R-AZ), Yea http://www...gress=107&session=2&vote=00237
Pillz rank	Fri Jul 28 18:22:08 2017 McCain hasn't found a war he didn't like...
Dukhat rank	Fri Jul 28 19:37:21 2017 Draw your false equivalency all you want. We know for sure Bush went to war listening to retards like Cheney whisper in his ear even though he promised a more isolationist policy on the campaign trail. I believe McCain would've certainly had a more balanced cabinet and probably not gone to war. But we'll never know for sure. We only know for sure that the far-right's favorite candidate, George W. Bush 100% did go to war just like we know their favorite candidate Donald J. Trump is an incompetent buffoon. And in 5 years, all the retarded right posters on this board will hate on Trump and claim that he failed them just like they did with Bush. Self-awareness is not the forte of the right.
Forwyn rank	Fri Jul 28 20:10:43 2017 You're fucking blind. McCain was calling for Saddam's ouster even before 9/11. Also: Q: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for fifty years. McCain: Make it a hundred.
Rugian rank	Fri Jul 28 20:16:55 2017 "Sen. John McCain (D-Ariz.)" Fixed
Rugian rank	Fri Jul 28 20:18:29 2017 And Dukhat is so fucking stupid. Mccain is one of the biggest war hawks in all of DC, we've spent years railing on him here over it. Dukhat seriously lives in his own little universe, completely disconnected from reality.
Jack Cafferty rank	Fri Jul 28 20:54:18 2017 McCain you killed us all!!!
Renzo Marquez rank	Sat Jul 29 00:16:27 2017 McTraitor's legacy is giving up information to the Gooks (since he claims torture doesn't work, we can assume he gave it up easy), Keating 5, endless war, and pandering to media-Americans.
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 00:26:27 2017 I love it. All the far-right retards are twisting in the wind right now in false righteousness. HAHAHAHA. You dumb fucking racists.
obaminated rank	Sat Jul 29 00:30:25 2017 It's amazing how much of a cuck cuckhat has become, he doesn't even attempt to defend himself when his idiocy is pointed out by all of us.
mexicantardnado rank	Sat Jul 29 00:52:17 2017 I am so retarded, I still don't realize that I've been ridiculed by everyone on the forum for my retardation for all of this time. Perhaps I won't be noticed as much as long as I continue use the "me too" card.
Renzo Marquez rank	Sat Jul 29 00:58:10 2017 McTraitor campaigned on repealing Obongocare for 7 years. Cucks like Cuckhat gave him money while he was campaigning on repealing Obongocare. Almost as bad as his donation to Jill Stein.
Senor Marquez rank	Sat Jul 29 01:01:23 2017 ^touches his own little negro.
obaminated rank	Sat Jul 29 02:03:55 2017 Multis are out in force tonight!
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 03:59:36 2017 Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement today on the Senate’s passage of the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act, legislation that would repeal Obamacare: “Today, I was proud to join my colleagues in Congress to continue the fight to repeal and replace Obamacare. Since its enactment, Obamacare has been full of empty promises that have only made our nation’s health care problems worse. I hear from Arizonans every day who have been saddled by rising premiums, increased health care costs, and reduced access to doctors and hospitals. In fact, according to data released last month, 24 insurance plans in the Obamacare exchanges will see double-digit rate hikes in 2016, while residents of Phoenix are expected to see their premiums increase to roughly 19 percent. The highest average premium increase in Arizona is projected to reach a whopping 78 percent. “For five long years, Americans have been let down by Obamacare’s broken promises. The legislation we passed today would unburden Americans from the harmful effects of this failed law and build a bridge to health care solutions that work for families in Arizona and across the country. It is clear that any serious attempt to improve our health care system must begin with a full repeal and replacement of Obamacare, and I will continue fighting on behalf of the people of Arizona to achieve it.” http://www...E0-3551-49D9-AA53-553C08552DD9
Cold Rod rank	Sat Jul 29 04:56:18 2017 cuckserves really upset with all the 'muh McCain'
werewolf dictator rank	Sat Jul 29 06:14:57 2017 On Morning Of 9/11 Attacks, McCain Immediately Began Making The Case For Iraq War By Faiz Shakir http://thi...case-for-iraq-war-4042b28b5f9b On the morning of the 9/11, just moments after the World Trade Center collapsed from the terrorist strikes, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) went on television and immediately began focusing the nation’s attention on Iraq. In an interview with CBS’ Dan Rather on 9/11, McCain said: "To be honest with you, Dan, I never thought that an operation of this sophistication and size would take place. I just never did. But I don’t think there’s any doubt that there are countries — Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea and others — who we know engage in proliferation of — of capabilities and, from time to time, involve themselves in state-sponsored terrorism. But never did we imagine on a scale such as this." The next day, on 9/12, McCain reiterated the point in an interview with Chris Matthews. “It isn’t just Afghanistan,” he said, “we’re talking about Syria, Iraq, Iran, perhaps North Korea, Libya and others.” Just a few weeks later — on Oct. 9, 2001 — McCain narrowed his focus, arguing that Iraq was “obviously” next: PAULA ZAHN: And as you know, Senator, the U.S. and Great Britain notified the U.N. Security Council yesterday that they reserve the right to strike against other countries in this campaign. What countries are we looking at? MCCAIN: Well, I think very obviously Iraq is the first country, but there are others — Syria, Iran, the Sudan, who have continued to harbor terrorist organizations and actually assist them. On Oct. 18, 2001, McCain told David Letterman, “the second phase is Iraq” while linking Iraq to the anthrax attacks. Watch it: In Jan. 2002, McCain visited a crowd of soldiers aboard the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt and yelled: “Next up, Baghdad!” The New York Times’ David Kirkpatrick recently noted that McCain “began making his case for invading Iraq to the public more than six months before the White House began to do the same.” The Times reported: "While pushing to take on Saddam Hussein, Mr. McCain also made arguments and statements that he may no longer wish to recall. He lauded the war planners he would later criticize, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. (Mr. McCain even volunteered that he would have given the same job to Mr. Cheney.) He urged support for the later-discredited Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi’s opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, and echoed some of its suspect accusations in the national media. And he advanced misleading assertions not only about Mr. Hussein’s supposed weapons programs but also about his possible ties to international terrorists, Al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks."
Aeros rank	Sat Jul 29 06:50:33 2017 McCain has always been clear that he wanted the Senate to return to regular order. His criticism of Obamacare was largely based on how the Democrats passed it. He has been in the Senate for 30 years. He is going to die soon. He is literally answerable to nobody but God now. And in a way that gives him the power to try and remind the Senate of just what it's purpose is. It is not a partisan rubber stamp.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 07:03:53 2017 With one vote, he gets to bask in the warmth and love of leftists with the memories of gold fish, who will now sing his praise and pander about how he was brave moderate worthy of respect. Fuck him and his legacy.
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 08:48:16 2017 The bill polled at 17%. He's basking in the glow of the vast majority of Americans that want this shitshow to stop and serious solutions to be presented to solve a serious problem. Your window is closed now you cuck. The far right lost its chance to prove it can govern. All future business will probably proceed like it did with Boehner as majority leader; with dem support and the far right mostly ignored.
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 08:50:42 2017 May be the last we see of McCain in public life. He's going home to get treated and prognosis is not good. Same disease that took Beau Biden and Ted Kennedy. Godspeed senator Mccain.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 08:53:53 2017 "The bill polled at 17%" How many read the bill?
hood rank	Sat Jul 29 09:17:55 2017 Haphazardly repealing ACA is retarded no matter how you try to dress it up. Completely. and utterly. fucking. retarded. If the 'pubs didn't suck donkey balls they'd have been drafting a plan that didn't amount to a whole lot of extras to the old and rich. But, they do. And their plan was rank. And these shitty repeals are rank.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 09:45:35 2017 The "skinny repeal" did little more than repeal the individual and employer mandate. Medicaid was not touched.
hood rank	Sat Jul 29 10:09:21 2017 Which is haphazardly repealing ACA. It is retarded and should have not made it to paper.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 10:11:19 2017 The most critical portions of ACA are Medicaid expansion and pre-existing clause. Mandates are just a coercive subsidy.
hood rank	Sat Jul 29 10:52:51 2017 You have no fucking idea how healthcare works. Mandates are absolutely critical in long term cost management. They promote healthcare use, which is a very good thing.
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 14:16:38 2017 "The most critical portions of ACA are Medicaid expansion and pre-existing clause. Mandates are just a coercive subsidy." Pre existing clause without mandate is unworkable, unless they come up with another coercive mechanism. Which they didn't in that repeal. That's basic insurance, unless you force healthy people to get in, insuring sick people (for the same rates) will bankrupt you. It is a pretty simple concept, I wish people would finally understand it
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 15:27:17 2017 I believe all the conservative hate over the mandate would end if you could opt out but also have to sign away your rights to free emergency room care. As long as hospitals are forced to treat people in the emergency room, then everyone should be forcced to buy insurance. But the conservatives are all chickenshit bullshitters anyways and would never do this. It's really just all about fake outrage over nothing. We're forced to buy insurance in order to drive a car. Health Insurance is no different especially when there are mechanisms in place to make it affordable for people with lower incomes or out-of-work.
Hot Rod rank	Sat Jul 29 16:08:00 2017 At whose expense?
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 16:57:13 2017 At whose expense what, Rod? Medicaid? I can explain but it probably would be better if you just demand to know who is paying next time you use Medicaid. Also, at whose expense do you want to build the ramps for the obese poor people like you, so you can ride your scooter? Or are you asking who paid for obamacare subsidies, a particular "at whose expense?". Then the answer is - a 2-3% income tax increase on the wealthy, a 2% tax on medical device industry and a sizeable cut in Medicare Advantage funding. Remember how you loved to trash Obama for cutting $700 billions from Medicare? Yep, that was to make ACA revenue neutral
Hot Rod rank	Sat Jul 29 17:18:22 2017 ^^^-Broken Record, Keep Those Stale Insults Coming.
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 17:26:15 2017 I have not said one insulting thing here. Maybe "obese", but you yourself say that you are overweight. As for being poor and on public dole, what is insulting here? You are too think skinned, bud
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 17:33:24 2017 "Mandates are absolutely critical in long term cost management." Guess that's working out. Insurance stocks climbing at double the rate of the market. Nothing like lining the pockets of insurance execs so I can show an insurance card to see my doctor once a year instead of just paying him $75. "They promote healthcare use, which is a very good thing." Yeah, it's awesome seeing ER visits continue to climb for non-emergencies.
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 17:38:54 2017 Your populist rant at insurance industry is correct but irrelevant here. You don't want socialized medicine, you don't seem to understand a simple concept of insurance pool where healthy subsidize the less healthy. AND you don't appreciate when for profit medical industry makes profit. Maybe there was s a third way to provide health care besides private or public, that haven't been discovered yet.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 18:07:30 2017 "You don't want socialized medicine," Actually, I've stated that UHC would be preferable to this crony capitalist garbage - which seems to be the long-term point of passing ACA. "you don't seem to understand a simple concept of insurance pool where healthy subsidize the less healthy." Opposing it from a moral standpoint doesn't mean I don't grasp it, no matter how many times you say it. I would rather pay a flat tax to assist those in need than have a private middleman collecting a multi-million dollar salary by forcing me to buy a product I don't use. "AND you don't appreciate when for profit medical industry makes profit." Let's not make a free market argument where mandates are concerned. But it stands to reason that if profits are soaring, they're not in the dire straits leftists pretend they are now, just like they made fun of Repubs for crying before ACA passed.
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 18:08:49 2017 I'd love to see the insurance industry gone too. The main reason Healthcare is so expensive in the US is the labyrinthine payment system of which the insurance industry is half the reason for. The other half is the vast bureaucracy in place just to collect money for hospitals. Use to be you had one payment officer for 5 doctors (back in the 90's). Now you have one for every doctor. Just one 60k-a-year dude figuring out how one doctor will be paid. Just because something exists in the private market doesn't mean it's any less shitty. Government does some things better and that includes things like insurance when the scale gets big enough. For example, the program that insures Federal employees is quite efficient and healthy. Tom Price suggested at one point (before he became a partisan hack) that people in the general public should be allowed to buy into it. This is moot. At the end of the day, it was easier for the Republicans and hardliners like Forwyn to whine all day rather than present a constructive solution and it ended these things do once the responsibility was wholly the Republicans to fix things: in disaster.
hood rank	Sat Jul 29 18:27:23 2017 "I believe all the conservative hate over the mandate would end if you could opt out but also have to sign away your rights to free emergency room care." Again, won't work. "Yeah, it's awesome seeing ER visits continue to climb for non-emergencies." ER visits doesn't really matter. ER admits do. http://www...ion%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D And here is the graph showing admits going down. Visits rising isn't the greatest, but admits is the real $ pusher. And getting people familiar with a PCP, going to a PCP regularly is how you reduce that visits number.
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 18:30:08 2017 "Opposing it from a moral standpoint doesn't mean I don't grasp it, no matter how many times you say it" If you do understand it, how is that you think that pre-existing clause is important, while a mechanism to coerce people to purchase insurance is not? I meant, if not mandate, then it has to be some other coercion, without it how the hell would insurers operate? Why would anyone healthy buy insurance ? Wait till you get sick, then buy it. If you don't get this concept then you don't understand how insurance works "But it stands to reason that if profits are soaring, they're not in the dire straits leftists pretend they are now, just like they made fun of Repubs for crying before ACA passed." Who is pretending that insurers are in dire straits? What leftists? Most leftists want to take all profit out of health care. You are confused. Moreover, ACA individual market part is a tiny segment of American health care market, 3%, so how do you even tie up insurers profits with ACA. They also make money on employer based insurance and on issuing policies for other non health care products. Pointing out an obvious nonsense about forcing insurers to cover sick without also giving them healthy customers is the same as crying about insurance industry being in dire straits
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 18:34:36 2017 "Actually, I've stated that UHC would be preferable to this crony capitalist garbage - which seems to be the long-term point of passing ACA. " What a confused stance, you should rant against employer based insurance system, not against ACA. Again, ACA is tiny compared to how many people use employer based health care.
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 18:47:46 2017 Republicans cherry pick information and abuse the ignorance of their base. All the GOP hear about in their media bubble is how insurers like Aetna are leaving states. Well yeah, Insurance leads to larger companies because risk is better dispersed among a larger pool. As for rural states that might not even have one insurer; that's the main point of the public option. You'd be subsidizing of course rural people at the expense of everybody else which really the largely rural republicans should be for but they will not entertain the idea because they want to keep their base desperate and worshipping at the alter of the "Free Market." It's weird how democrat programs to help the poor always affect mostly people in red states. And then those people in red states get angry because they think most of the benefits go to brown people. Fucking idiots.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 19:01:46 2017 "how is that you think that pre-existing clause is important, while a mechanism to coerce people to purchase insurance is not?" Yeah, should have been clear on "critical" - it's the most-used portion of ACA to drum up support against attempts to repeal. "without it how the hell would insurers operate?" I care about the health of the insurance industry about as much as I care about the health of the coal industry, or fidget spinner manufacturers. "you don't understand how insurance works" I'm not the one propagating the myth that "insurance" is where someone signs on with a totaled car and gets a subsidized plan wherein they pay a token fee into a pool and pull thousands out on day one. "you should rant against employer based insurance system," Nothing wrong with employers offering health insurance as an incentive, but yes, I've railed against employer mandate alongside individual mandate. I have to ensure every week that my part-timers stay under a 29.5 average. Several want to work more, sorry, hands are tied. But go on the exchange and get some insurance yourself, increasing the federal deficit and lining private pockets. What a boon for the lower middle class
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 19:35:09 2017 "I care about the health of the insurance industry about as much as I care about the health of the coal industry, or fidget spinner manufacturers. " IWhy is it you are discussing policy then? This is like arguing about fire safety methods with someone who doesn't care if building burns down. Why not stick with "unconstitutional blah blah" rants and leave actual policy discussion to others? "I'm not the one propagating the myth that "insurance" is where someone signs on with a totaled car and gets a subsidized plan wherein they pay a token fee into a pool and pull t" No idea what you are talking about, specifically, but that's how insurance works. The risk is shared, that's how people can afford it. . Bad optics sometimes? Sure. Easy to rile up the "rugged individualists" with? Yes. But that's how it works. "Nothing wrong with employers offering health insurance as an incentive, but yes, I've railed against employer mandate alongside individual mandate. " No, not employer mandates. The whole concept of employee based health insurance, for most people. When you say that UHC is preferable to ACA. Well, UHC wouldn't be replacing ACA, if you want it for America. It would be replacing employer based insurance (for most people again, some choose to also augment their coverage with work policies) And on a side note, to make you understand how insurance works, you know how in employer based system, which you like, everyone in the office pays same rate for same policy? How healthy young employees pay same as fat old ones. That's because they share the risk, and insurers still make profits.
Forwyn rank	Sat Jul 29 19:48:17 2017 "This is like arguing about fire safety methods with someone who doesn't care if building burns down." Yes, it's like arguing about the entire town pumping funds into fire safety for a local bar that only a portion of the populace frequent. "that's how insurance works." In the past few years. Not in the history of any insurance ever. I can't take out a policy for my home after it's burned down. "It would be replacing employer based insurance" And? There are many options, including expanding federal programs to cover the pre-existing pool, or outright UHC. As you've said, this doesn't mean that employer-based health coverage can't co-exist, or give me a reason to rail against it in general. "Why not stick with "unconstitutional blah blah" rants" That one's good, too. Federal mandate lining the pockets of private enterprises. An incredible growth of centralized power.
CrownRoyal rank	Sat Jul 29 20:16:09 2017 "Yes, it's like arguing about the entire town pumping funds into fire safety for a local bar that only a portion of the populace frequent. " Yes, you got it. We chose to fund things we don't use all the time. Wars, police, courts, roads, etc. Now, funding a bar would be a bad policy, but that's not what you are arguing about. For insurance business to work, you need shared risk. When you say "I don't give a shot about insurers" that's not an argument for a better policy. (Unless you propose alternatives to insurers). Someone has to insure people, govt, or in US system, private insurers. Saying that their business health is irrelevant is saying that you don't give a shit about the whole argument we are having here. Which is fine, but unclear why you bother posting in this thread "In the past few years. Not in the history of any insurance ever. I can't take out a policy for my home after it's burned down. " Yes, in the history. That's the only way the business works. And yes, you can't take insurance after the house burned down, this exactly the reason there is a mandate. Otherwise everyone would do it (after getting sick). For insurance business to work, to be able to pay out people, they need paying customers whose house will never burn down "And? " And that's why I said that you are confused when you say that UHC is preferable to ACA. It is like saying that pears are preferable to Tuesday, a nonsense. Universal coverage would be replacing the existing employer based coverage, that's how the majority of Americans get their health care. "That one's good, too. Federal mandate lining the pockets of private enterprises. An incredible growth of centralized power." Right. But unless we socialize everything that we use, that's how capitalism operates. You can argue about growth, about percentages here or there. The concept remains though
Dukhat rank	Sat Jul 29 22:27:16 2017 "Yes, it's like arguing about the entire town pumping funds into fire safety for a local bar that only a portion of the populace frequent. " Only unlike a bar, everyone will get sick in their life and everyone will die. And everyone has guaranteed access to Emergency Rooms. If that's the case than they should fucking pay for it. If you don't like the mandate then the natural alternative is single payer. At least with the mandate you have some options ... unless you live in some Red-State rural area that may not even have an insurer anymore and whose asshole governor didn't expand medicaid because fuck the government amirite? "In the past few years. Not in the history of any insurance ever. I can't take out a policy for my home after it's burned down. " If your house burns down and you were dumb enough not to have insurance, you can start over and learn your fucking lesson. If you get sick with something expensive insurance and don't have health insurance, you will die. But before you die, you will probably go to the emergency room and get expensive care that will barely extend your life and cost the rest of us millions of dollars. The ACA decreased the rate at which Healthcare costs were rising. http://tim...a-health-care-costs-obamacare/ "These increased costs for employers and employees alike may seem steep—up around 50% over the past eight years—but they could have risen far higher had the Affordable Care Act never passed. The Kaiser study shows that average family premiums rose 20% from 2011 to 2016. That rate of increase is actually much lower than the previous five years (up 31% from 2006 to 2011) and the five years before that (up 63% from 2001 to 2006)." This is always the rallying cry of Republicans and most of their retard base eats it up. If you want something better than ACA, support single payer or government administered universal catastrphoic insurance. Otherwise you're just a dumb neckbeard repeating talking points. "And? There are many options, including expanding federal programs to cover the pre-existing pool, or outright UHC. As you've said, this doesn't mean that employer-based health coverage can't co-exist, or give me a reason to rail against it in general. " I agree, you have a constructive plan to make healthcare more portable? I would love to hear it and if the numbers are there support it. But all I hear is straight repeal and you thinking the previous system was better. It clearly wasn't. Employer-based insurance is a legacy of the way the economy use to be when unionization rates were much higher and companies offered better health insurance as a way to attract more workers. It is antiquated now. The ACA exchanges are the best way to make insurance more portable and affordable. Many older workers with a family are handcuffed to their job because of their insurance. Could it be better? Yes. And almost all the ideas are dem ideas (since almost no republican in the last 6 years has suggested anything close to what you're suggesting). "That one's good, too. Federal mandate lining the pockets of private enterprises. An incredible growth of centralized power." Versus the incredible overbearing power of corporations who write their own legislation with ALEC and mail exact copies to Republican legislators? Or the Koch brothers who own the GOP and push for more tax cuts for themselves so they can have more money to lobby and push for more tax cuts? Too much power in the hands of too few people is always a problem. You seem to have missed the last 40 years of history where corporations have grown out of control along with CEO salaries. It is kind of a mystery to me how you have acknowledge things like massive income disparity in the past and yet you are somehow still knee-jerk "conservative" even though they present absolutely no answers for the problem. What? DO you think universal basic income will go mostly and unfairly to brown people? I would truly like to know.
hood rank	Sun Jul 30 00:15:29 2017 "government administered universal catastrphoic insurance." This makes things more expensive. The best way to reduce healthcare costs is to prevent the expensive shit. This means getting people in to see doctors and to get healthy. Treating causes before they snowball. If you're just looking to cover costs as people hit the ER, you're just looking to make it worse.
Aeros rank	Sun Jul 30 01:25:45 2017 There should be government sponsored primary care and preventive care. So many people end up in the ER and bill Medicade thousands of dollars for issues that could have been fixed with a 20 dollar perscription for Antibiotics.
hood rank	Sun Jul 30 01:36:41 2017 Or take Aeros' asshole problem. Instead of being refused medical treatment like the military did to him, pretend he simply didn't have insurance and couldn't afford care. By the time he finally got care (for uninsured: ER visit; for him, walked into a VA place himself), it was a full blown problem that required serious care and regular upkeep. If Aeros had been allowed proper care (in this analogy, if he had insurance to go see a PCP immediately instead of having to wait), he likely wouldn't have broken asshole syndrome. That's a lot of money saved.
Aeros rank	Sun Jul 30 02:24:58 2017 For the record in my case I did have insurance but was misdiagnosed for over a year.
hood rank	Sun Jul 30 03:42:54 2017 Right, but weren't you going to army docs who refused to acknowledge anything was wrong?
Aeros rank	Sun Jul 30 03:48:21 2017 Yep.
Dukhat rank	Sun Jul 30 04:21:40 2017 So I guess you could Aeros is the only one among us here that has legitimate reason to be butthurt over politics. ... I'll show myself out now.
Hot Rod rank	Sun Jul 30 04:25:22 2017 That's worse than my jokes.
smart dude rank	Sun Jul 30 04:49:27 2017 No it isn't, Rod.
Hot Rod rank	Sun Jul 30 05:08:25 2017 You cannot judge. You have no sense of humor.
Aeros rank	Sun Jul 30 07:50:06 2017 I am not butthurt anymore thankfully. I doubt even the taxpayers are either. VA is allowed to negotiate for what it pays for medecine unlike medicaid and Medicare. They probably pay the same amount everyone else in the world does, which is about 1000% cheaper.
Forwyn rank	Sun Jul 30 18:07:01 2017 "We chose to fund things we don't use all the time. Wars, police, courts, roads, etc." All public products. I benefit from China not crossing the pacific for a Yellow Dawn, I can call the police, sue my neighbor, and drive down the road with restrictions. Joe Blow having private insurance is totally separate, and comparing taxes to a mandate to buy a private product is equally separate. "Which is fine, but unclear why you bother posting in this thread" I missed where the OP was a WSJ article about insurance industry health. "Yes, in the history. That's the only way the business works. And yes, you can't take insurance after the house burned down, this exactly the reason there is a mandate." Except that the entire point of mandating that I buy house insurance is to cover people whose houses have already burned down. So no, that's not how insurance works, in any other industry, or even health insurance, up until less than a decade ago. "It is like saying that pears are preferable to Tuesday, a nonsense." Not really. A vast change from a multi-payer system can be instituted incrementally, and as one of the biggest selling points of ACA was eliminating uninsured, these would naturally be the first covered. Employer-based insurance can co-exist with a single-payer system, the latter isn't a vacuum. "But unless we socialize everything that we use, that's how capitalism operates. You can argue about growth, about percentages here or there. The concept remains though" I think you're really, utterly, foundationally confused about the definition of capitalism. Mandates are not free market, subsidies are not free market. "The ACA decreased the rate at which Healthcare costs were rising." By shuffling the costs to the federal deficit, to the tune of over half a trillion dollars over the next 8 years. "support single payer" Being pragmatic, I have voiced tentative support for both single-payer and UBC, so you can chill on the "hurrr neckbeard, muh brown people" nonsense.
hood rank	Sun Jul 30 19:44:29 2017 "By shuffling the costs to the federal deficit, to the tune of over half a trillion dollars over the next 8 years." So less than 1 year of DOD funding? That seems remarkably reasonable. "Except that the entire point of mandating that I buy house insurance is to cover people whose houses have already burned down." Any attempt to compare health insurance to other insurance industries is excessively retarded. People are already insured to receive a minimum amount of care simply by entering a hospital in serious condition. They are already covered, in a sense, as hospitals charge everyone else more to cover the cost of those who will never be able to pay. And these hospital stays are the most costly types of care. So if you have a hospital near you, if your insurance company has relations with 1 or many hospitals, you were already covering minimum levels of care for everyone in your geographic location. All we've done is say that these minimum levels of care should be better to prevent those costly hospital stays and thus reduce the overall cost of healthcare.
Forwyn rank	Sun Jul 30 20:48:13 2017 "So less than 1 year of DOD funding?" 800 > 600, so no. In any case, I have also voiced support for DoD cuts. "That seems remarkably reasonable." It's also a smoke and mirrors charade. Cost increase rate slows, but debt share per capita increases. "Any attempt to compare health insurance to other insurance industries is excessively retarded." Not really. The basic actuarial science across industry fields is virtually identical. Pools mitigate risk, and various plan diversify it. Term life insurance for healthy 30 year olds is a money-maker, just as it is in health insurance. The point is that while we say it's "fair" to force people to get insurance while healthy to minimize manipulative sign-ups when they get sick, they're subsidizing just that - people signing up when sick.
hood rank	Sun Jul 30 21:33:27 2017 "Not really. The basic actuarial science across industry fields is virtually identical." It's like you didn't read anything after the sentence you quoted. People already get care when sick, whether they have insurance or not. That already happens. We are already subsidizing the uninsured every time they show up to the hospital with a serious condition. As such, you cannot compare it to other insurance types.
Forwyn rank	Sun Jul 30 21:39:00 2017 Uninsured drivers. Uninsured homeowners. Uninsured deaths. Communities assist with all of these, the only matter is scale.
Dukhat rank	Mon Jul 31 00:17:27 2017 Actuarial Science is the same but outcomes are not. If you don't get insurance for anything else (except life), then you get to learn your lesson, walk away, and start over. But if your dumb uninsured ass gets sick, society HAS to treat you with the emergency room at the very least. Given that is true, then we should have health insurance reform that minimizes costs and provides more or less universal coverage because universal coverage through emergency rooms is bullshit. Dems did over-reach a bit in that they taxed the rich to help the poor but what's done is done. I'm not going to argue that the 1% get a small tax cut so millions lose their health insurance at this point especially when the face of the 1% right now is fucking Donald Trump. But everything else they said would happened did. The rate of growth of healthcare costs and premiums went down and Insurance is more portable. I was better able to quit my old job because I no longer depended on my firm to negotiate me cheap plans. I can just go on the Obamacare exchanges. They won on the issue. Move on.
Dukhat rank	Mon Jul 31 00:42:16 2017 "Except that the entire point of mandating that I buy house insurance is to cover people whose houses have already burned down." Only in this situation everyone's house will eventually burn down because everyone will die eventually. So let's get everyone have insurance for that event now. Yes, the young have a lower chance of getting sick which is why they pay less for health insurance. And yes, they pay more relative to their risk relative old people because of price controls. But they can still get sick and die because everybody gets help if they get sick no matter the age with standardized insurance. "Not really. A vast change from a multi-payer system can be instituted incrementally, and as one of the biggest selling points of ACA was eliminating uninsured, these would naturally be the first covered. Employer-based insurance can co-exist with a single-payer system, the latter isn't a vacuum. " I'm not sure what you're saying here. Employer-based insurance is bullshit. I should be able to quit a shitty job instead of being coerced to stay because they happen to be a big company and have more bargaining power to lower insurance rates. The ACA isn't perfect in that regard but it's better than the crap we had before. "I think you're really, utterly, foundationally confused about the definition of capitalism. Mandates are not free market, subsidies are not free market." A perfectly free market leads to market capture by monopolists and shit outcomes for 99% of most people. America has this cult about the free market that only exists because it use to be that you could say, "Fuck it, I'm going West" when things got bad in the cities. This is the shit that Hitler wanted for the Germans. His lebenstraum was, to him, analagous to the wide open plains of America depopulated of Indians that made America grow so fast and easily absorb immigration. The frontier is gone. It is incredibly hard to strike it on your own now with the existing power of market-based, corporate entities. "By shuffling the costs to the federal deficit, to the tune of over half a trillion dollars over the next 8 years. " The ACA is completely funded by it's taxes on the 1% and the medical devices tax. It is remarkable how over 20 million more people are insured for so low a relative cost. What drives the deficit is debt servicing (thank you republicans), meaningless defense spending (thank you Republicans), and most of all Medicare/Social Security. And the Republican base is old white people that are dependent Social Security and Medicare. Dems did implement the last 2 programs but they're not the ones that refuse to compromise and make them solvent. If the Reagan and Bush Tax cuts had never happened, our debt would easily be less than half and our economy still would've chugged along. "Being pragmatic, I have voiced tentative support for both single-payer and UBC, so you can chill on the "hurrr neckbeard, muh brown people" nonsense." Cool, I look forward to you supporting the next step: single payer with extreme costs caused by unpredictable catastophic events covered by a tax on the super rich.
Hot Rod rank	Mon Jul 31 00:52:05 2017 Caused by 330,000,000 patience.
Hot Rod rank	Mon Jul 31 01:05:30 2017 *-patients
CrownRoyal rank	Mon Jul 31 21:13:02 2017 "All public products. I benefit from China not crossing the pacific for a Yellow Dawn, I can call the police, sue my neighbor, and drive down the road with restrictions. Joe Blow having private insurance is totally separate, and comparing taxes to a mandate to buy a private product is equally separate. " It is unsurprising that we all have ideas and preferences of what exactly is beneficial to us, and where our tax money should be spent. But at the end it is just an opinion. I don't want to pay for wars or police or welfare but I am paying taxes. "I missed where the OP was a WSJ article about insurance industry health. " without insurance industry, there is no argument about anything. This is reality - insurance industry insures people in US. We are debating insurance. You say you don't give a shit if insurance industry exists or not. Unless you propose some replacement for that industry, what are we even talking about? "So no, that's not how insurance works, in any other industry, or even health insurance, up until less than a decade ago. " I am talking about the concept of insurance, where the risk is shared. Otherwise, the is no insurance. People would just get insurance after the event they are insuring against already happened. When you say no mandate (and no other coersive mechanism), but leave pre-existing clause in, I feel the need to inquire how such plan would work. "I think you're really, utterly, foundationally confused about the definition of capitalism. Mandates are not free market, subsidies are not free market. " I did not make myself clear on that one. What I meant is unless we nationalize things that we collectively use, some or other private enterprize will profit, providing these services. Line their pockets, as you put it. Now, it is pretty clear to me that govt-run HC is cheaper and no less effective than privately run HC. But, as a general concept, there is nothing outrageous about business making money off govt policies, like any contractor.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: