40 Economists Just Destroyed Every Big Republican Lie About The Healthcare Bill

And most Americans get their insurance through their employers, in spite of people like Clinton, Obama and Trump supporting the notion of single payer. Most employer insurance plans didn't increase in cost at the pace they did before the ACA. The last few years it's been an average of 3 percent a year. Before that it was over 10 percent a year.

 

Wait, we the people made no promises to pay for health care?

Watch this true story of how it got explained to Davy Crockett when he was in congress and how he woke up to the nature of Fedeal funds.

 

Does "We the People" actually include those People? How indiscriminate!

Why is it that the pantywaists never seem to get pissy about the annual subsidy to sustain employer-sponsored coverage?

160 million non-elderly people in the United States obtain health insurance through an employer in large part because the tax system subsidizes the purchase of employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI) to the tune of $250 billion in lost federal tax revenue annually.

Well, aren't they special?

 

Lets see. Lying about health care. I don't think anything Republicans can ever say until the end times will ever top the lies "If you like your plan you can keep your plan. PERIOD" and "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. PERIOD." and "The average family will save $2500 a year on their health insurance premiums". Then there was the promise that illegal aliens couldn't get covered under Obamacare...LIE. The the promise that Obamacare would "bend the cost curve down".....LIE. Companies wouldn't be required to cover birth control (told to Congressman Bart Stupak to his face by Obama to get his vote). It was all lies, every word of it including the "the" and the "and" and the "."

Anything Republicans ever say in the future about anything they propose regarding healthcare is given a pass, so huge, so knowingly untrue were those lies that helped get the two or three necessary Democrat votes to pass Obamacare.

 

I didn't have any issues affording healthcare before ocare came along. Most middle class working Americans had a tough time affording ocare. Only upper middle class+ and impoverished people benefited from it because rich didn't miss the money and poor didn't pay. It shouldn't be tough for a hard working tax payer to look for, and find a plan that benefits them and fits inside their budget.

 

How about the kind of plan that you voluntarily pay for, but are forced to pay extra for those who don't? Now that's what I call getting willfully (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) on just so some one else can come in and (*)(*)(*)(*) on top of your health care policy, while making you believe you're getting a deal, because you weren't mandated to pay for someone else. And, it wasn't even a mandate. You are willfully paying for someone else. Now isn't that about as good an example of one dumb (*)(*)(*) blind person leading the other dumb (*)(*)(*) blind person around?

 

LOL, you can nitpick and spin and tap-dance all day, it won't change the fact that obamacare is a disaster and was a big fat lie. Premiums went way up, coverage went down, deductibles skyrocketed, availability of doctors is less, the nation is facing a huge shortage of physicians in the next 10 years, 100,000,000 people are on the verge of losing their insurance.

You had your chance and screwed up everything. Stop moaning and take your defeat like a man.

 

Yeah, sounds just like obamacare. I'm consistent enough to hate the same plan if it's proposed under Trump. You, on the other hand, are so inconsistent that you will praise obamacare and then demonize obamacare if it was proposed exactly the same by Trump.

 

Let's see do you actually even know what the cuts are?

 

He probably has a cat.

 

Offering maternity vs mandating is completely two different things. I do remember plans back in the 90s that didn't have maternity at all, basically you were out 10-13 grand if you had a baby, but that's been gone for a while. To answer your question yes on the a la carte for individual market, I'm sure your bundling some but not all more patient based.

 

I just depends on what kind of Socialism makes the best fit. For example, I find very few of these pantywaists, as you so eloquently describe, complaining about these particular groups;

I'm guessing these subsidies are more important than the sick, the disabled, and the elderly?

You would think Republicans would want to drop the sports subsidies and give them to the less fortunate? But I was wrong. Hence, just another reason for this thread. And it comes at such a fitting time too. Republicans seem to be really enjoying it with heads exploding.

 

Your sniveling does not impose your righteousness upon humanity, but if you wish to propose a list of whom you approve and disapprove as being eligible for needed medical care, send it to Mitch McConnell. I'm sure he'd value your input immensely.

- and let's ask Amish folks if the foolhardy who indulge themselves in the reckless practice of driving cars should exclude them from care. They are constantly doing themselves costly mischief!

 

I agree Obamacare as it was presented to us was a lie, starting with its name. It didn't make healthcare affordable. In fact, it didn't do much if anything to bring healthcare costs down. Neither does the new Republican plan from what I can see.

But premiums didn't go way up and coverage didn't go way down. Premiums actually didn't increase at the rate they were increasing before the ACA, and coverage went up. That's part of the knock against it. People are paying for coverage they don't want. Insurance plans now have more coverage than they did before the ACA, not less.

Not sure how the ACA impacted the number of doctors. We have a doctor shortage because fewer people can afford the education to be a doctor.

How will 100 million people lose their insurance? Most of us have employer insurance.

 

Exactly. This seems so obvious even a child should understand, I honestly can't believe we have anyone arguing about it still.

Exactly.

Yes, maternity coverage was a huge culprit.

Single women don't need maternity coverage either, if we're not going to have children.

Good

It always seems to be the middle class who gets walked on

 

As far as the ACA in Arizona, the 116% projected increase next year is not a shining example of cost containment:

https://www.google.com/amp/newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/10/25/arizona-obamacare-premiums/amp/

 

So the insurance companies have agreed to offer a la carte insurance? Can you link that?

I don't remember any plans where I could pick and choose if I wanted maternity care. And I've been working and buying my own insurance since 1984 when I graduated from college. My employers, like most I knew of, offered HMOs or PPOs or that sort of thing, with different costs depending on the deductible, but never an a la carte plan.

 

"WE the People" is a promise to take care of its own. The requirements for how it is done is totally irrelevant, so long as "WE THE PEOPLE" took care of its own. "PERIOD"!

 

The ACA did nothing to contain costs. I've already said that.

But my post wasn't about the ACA insurance. It was about employer sponsored insurance.

 

The US is the Rx for all advanced democratic nations that inexplicably maintain medical coverage for all citizens at around half the cost, citizens that also incur much lower prices from Big Pharma. Why can't they see the ideological folly of their ways? Are they blinded by their economic superiority and demonstrable efficiency?

 

Sniveling?

LMFAO!

I'm not the one crying and sniffling because someone won't pay for my stuff.

Stop projecting!

 

Except Trumpcare isn't the same as Obamacare. So congratulations on telling me nothing.

 

Its time democrats stop lying about this bill. Bout time they stop lying to themselves about Obamacare too.

 

But MILLIONS could DIE!!!!! The Democrats told me so!!!!

 

There were no additional mandated coverages in Obamcare that weren't already in your current insurance