Trump to end Obamacare subsidies that help low-income Americans

Those countries have a large variety of systems and price fixing isn't the only way to get lower costs.

 

The purpose of ObamaCare is:

1. To reduce property taxes on the rich, transferring the cost to working people
2. Give excuse to deny the poor any medical care by requiring co-pays they can not claim, while lying claiming they have insurance.
3. To kill off as many poor people as possible.

ObamaCare increasing is mass murder.

 

Almost all the Obamacare taxes are on the rich and the it mostly paid for healthcare for the poor. What on earth are you talking about?

 

The Democrat plan is universal health care with the requirement that:

1. No one who can not prepay 20% of the total costs receives no care whatsoever and
2. Anyone who does have the 20% is put on a 1 year waiting list.
3, If still alive a year later, the receive a prescription they don't get unless they can pay 20% of it, given an appointment for a year later to see if the prescription worked.
4. If after these 2 years, the prescription did not cure them, they get a new prescription and another appointment a year later.
5. If, after 5 years, the person still needs any medical care, if they have 20% the total costs then they will receive treatment if a committee determines a cure is 100% certain. Otherwise, treatment is denied and the person is sold pain pills.

 

I am curious how you would respond to the argument that the greater choice here only benefits the healthy and young which, in turn, would hurt the sick and the old.

 

Cough up their copays? I'm not sure if this is relevant to your point, but Obamacare does offer assistance for the poor to cover their out of pocket expenses, like copays.

 

...are you high?

Seriously, where are you getting all of these "details" about the "democrat" healthcare plans or goals?

 

That's fine, as long as it's allocated money But what's at play here is billion of stolen tax payer money be used to reimburse/subsidies insurers, it's not important what they use it for, the issue is legality.

 

Much like the moronic reasoning behind attacking dreamers, the President should not be rescind and threaten millions of people based on his sole interpretation of how the courts will ultimately decide a legal issue.

 

I think is pretty sad when most reps in Washington are lawyers and yet these simple and most basic rules of law are somehow missed! I also find it odd that ordinary Joe's and Jill's are willing to toss these same basic rules of law to the wayside. All you do is set yourselves up for heartbreak, this country is built on laws and we have a plethora of lawyers just chomping at the bit at a chance to have them litigated Trump is Washington's worst case scenario, we all know he is no stranger to litigation he has spent almost his entire life dealing with courts! So now we all get to deal with a person that will use the letter of the law and challenge things that are against the law..

The mistake the Dems are making is they are so convinced that Trump is going to be impeached that they are dug in and alienating Trump. So now he is pissed off because it's personal and political, and he is vindictive! We haven't seen nothing yet

 

The cost was always there. It was just redistributed.

 

They don't make pools like that. Group policies get grouped with other group policies also. There would never be groups of only males or only females.

Even policies bought on the "individual market" get put into pools

 

You make a LOT of assumptions, but provide no supporting documentation.

First, I have never said that I "want to cut taxes for billionaires so you can cut healthcare coverage for the people who need it most?" You pulled that gem out of your, uh, ear. If I ruled the country, I would have the entire U. S. Tax Code re-written from the first word, to get rid of ALL tax-loopholes, tax-exemptions, tax-shelters, and tax-writeoff's. And where did you get the idea that "Obamacare taxes came almost completely from the rich"...? The truth is, thanks to the miserably unfair Tax Code we are saddled with, the rich may APPEAR to pay more tax because they fall into a higher tax bracket -- but, with all the loopholes, shelters, exemptions, and writeoff's, most of them actually pay little or nothing. Hint: the wealthy keep armies of tax attorneys and tax accountants busy to make certain that they never will....

And you think that we should keep Obamacare because, "The competition to get jobs is brutal and you have to compete against 40 other applications to get a job"...? Oh, you would have LOVED to have been trying to get a job, fresh out of college, back in the mid-70's! We had tremendous economic disruption because of the fall-off in government spending after the collapse of the Vietnam War, which brought on nearly a decade of "Stagflation". Imagine everything you find so dreadful about your job prospects today, and then add soaring price increases in everything, plus a Prime Interest rate that reached 20%. That is what we lived with beginning with Nixon, and then skyrocketing right through Jimmuh Cawduh. If you enjoyed the so-called "Great Recession", you would have LOVED the 1970's, when it was REALLY hard to get and keep a good job! Today's 'job market' is tough...? Cry me a river!

But none of that has anything to do with 'healthcare', per se. So, let's just go ahead and forget about how much money the U. S. has had to spend propping up socialistic countries all over the world and focus on the key central point: Why is it the responsibility of the government or any of those who pay taxes to it to buy or subsidize healthcare insurance, or pay medical expenses, for ANYONE?! Maybe if we start with that, we can get to something that makes factual sense.

 

Where do you get this ****? Lol

 

Your statement is understood that in a free market, the government should stay out f it. And I agree with that in principle.

The problem we have today is very ironic when put in context with yours/mine positions that the free market should work to solve this problem. The real problem we have today is that the healthcare industry has used our democracy to skew their position in the marketplace. They have bought favored legislation to allow themselves to control their own pricing, and then they added layers into the system which drove prices up even higher.

EX: Pharmaceutical companies:
First they bought politicians to get favored legislation that basically used tax dollars to fund R&D at colleges all across the country. That research yields many of the the advancements we see in drugs in this country today. But then they got them to create laws that basically say, "since we (The pharmaceutical company) are paying for the drug trials, and all of the testing, all of the profits should go directly to us."

Then they lobbied to change the patent laws to not only extend, but in some cases give them patents in perpetuity by allowing very small changes to the patents which reset their timers. Very minimal changes to the formulas like those that change the color of the pill allow them to basically restart the clock.

Now, there's some level of capitalism built into the system, but that too has been bastardized by the profit motive. Insurance companies were originally designed to keep providers honest by setting costs. The problem was that once they realized the power they had, they started finding ways to increase their own profits. So now we have layers of profit, in a system already driven by profit.

Although we agree conceptually, i get real frustrated (not directed at you squidward) when people jump on their soapbox and start espousing how Obamacare is anti-free market, when in reality the system we have today has been so bastardized it is to the point where it hasn't resembled a free market since the 80's

 

Ha, Ha. No I don't.

Nope, the biggest Obamacare taxes like the Surtax on Investment Income, Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax, Individual Mandate Excise Tax, and Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans fall on the rich. This is the income impact of Trumpcare repealing the Obamacare taxes and cutting benefits to the poor to balance it all out. Its mostly a tax cut for the rich to uninsure and cut benefits to the poor and working class.

Wrong. The rich pay higher rates than everyone else and this has been proven by multiple studies:

This is what you said:
"So, here in the States, in addition to all the other numerous welfare handouts, with Obamacare, 'Peter' has to pay for 'Peter', and, 'Peter' has to pay a "subsidy" to 'Paul'...? Can someone make a good, logical, solid case that can explain how this is anything but theftfrom taxpayers?"

You took the position against Obamacare taxes on the rich to pay for healthcare for working class Americans.

But that would greatly raise the effective taxes paid by the middle class, working class, and poor people. How would you adjust tax brackets for the rich compared to the middle class and the poor? Would you get rid of Medicare and Medicaid?

Yes, thinks were worse at times but it doesn't change the fact that jobs are tight right now and its not that people are lazy but there aren't enough jobs.

The reality is that the poor and working class have no way to pay for healthcare because the premium costs about $15,000 - $20,000 per family with no employer contribution and that isn't talking into account the $5,000-$10,0000 deductible and the 25% out of pocket for health expenses. Without Medicaid if a poor person gets sick they are just screwed and will end up rolling in healthcare debt that the rest of us are going to have to pay for anyway. Our medical debt is as big as our student loan and credit card debt combined.

 

You do make some logical, truthful points. So, how do you feel about 'single-payer'? It may surprise you to know that even though I'm a fiscal Conservative, I see a great deal of potential benefit in a single-payer system (keeping Medicaid, of course, for those who could not pay premiums to be in that customer-base).

I agree that healthcare costs have skyrocketed into insanity. My German friends tell me all the time that we Americans are getting screwed to death -- especially regarding costs on prescription drugs! But Obamacare, as Jonathan Gruber and Chief Justice Roberts rolled it out, solves nothing! It has simply had the effect of providing a government conduit for 'Peter' to go on being robbed to pay subsidies for 'Paul'. We need to tear down the whole, rotten Obamacare edifice and start over, IMHO, with single-payer system (ruthlessly regulated by a government bidding process every 3 - 5 years), and, Medicaid, of course, for those who must be provided with welfare. What say you...?

 

Let's undo the anti free market aspects, don't add more anti free market regulation. It will be worse.

 

it's what they do to their providers.

 

should have asked the fed not to create a credit boom 20 years ago

 

Again price controls isn't the only way to lower prices.

 

Why do you believe that the credit boom is responsible for the rise in healthcare spending?

 

We overhaul all healthcare regulations and business regulations to make it easy for healthcare companies to operate and reduce their administration cost. We also mandate simple pricing for healthcare by health insurance companies and hospitals with a single-rate for everything and everyone and no crazy loopholes. Healthcare pricing should be like pricing for a big mac where everyone sees the price on the billboard and gets the same simple price. We should also mandate that all insurance companies and hospitals put up their simple pricing and coverage on a government websites so that consumers can compare them.

We should also allow the government, insurance companies and hospitals to get cheap procedure and drugs overseas easily without major restrictions or red tape. Next we should provide funding to new hospitals and drug company startups to get more competition in the healthcare industry and flood medical programs for doctors and nurses with scholarships so we have tons of competition and this will drive down their wages. We should also make a government agency that snoops around and makes sure that hospitals and drug companies aren't price fixing raising their prices together to get extra profits.

Lastly I replace Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran's, and Obamacare with a government program that will cover 100% of preventative care and 75% of all other care. If you choose a provider that is low-cost and is done in a non-wasteful way then the government will cover 100% of those other costs. You can also use a private insurance to cover the rest. In addition you can take a certain amount comparable to your coverage and use it for private coverage rather than government coverage (like school choice subsidies). I would get rid of all the separate healthcare taxes and simply add it all to a progressive income tax.

 

Nearly every graph you produce that shows wealth disparity can be replicated using only age. Young people simply have far less wealth than older people. The cruel and unjust system of Obamacare burdens those with far less wealth with the health insurance costs of the far more wealthy, by limiting the choices of the young and much poorer. It's just one more way that the older and wealthier screw the young and poorer in this nation. We need to find ways to do this less, not more.

If you want to help the older and less affluent with their healthcare costs, by all means do so, but it is not "compassionate" to force their costs on the young and much poorer Americans.

Forcing someone else to carry another's costs is not "compassionate" and frankly it requires little personal sacrifice from you, merely virtue signalling. And that is where the rubber hits the road, compassion generally requires sacrifice and the sacrifice you engage in true compassion is a personal one, of your own free will.

 

Most of your suggestions would be beneficial, especially the parts concerning an overhaul of healthcare and business regulations, and, simple pricing. I also see great potential benefit in bringing in competent, ethical foreign drug competitors into a list of legal providers to U. S. customers. And, in theory, I like the idea of providing 'funding' for new hospitals, drug company startups, doctors, nurses, etc., to increase competition, as long as the processes and participants are closely monitored, as you suggested.

But, I cannot support the idea that you propose regarding the replacement of Medicare and the Veterans Health Administration. Those two are EARNED entitlements for those served in the military, or, those who were forced to pay into the Medicare system all their working lives, whereas, in stark contrast, Obamacare requires the mechanism of government 'subsidies' (another word for "welfare"), and Medicaid is entirely, 100% government handout welfare. These, the EARNED and the UNEARNED categories should never be blended, mixed, or confused! Someone on welfare does not deserve to be provided the same benefits as someone who has EARNED them!

A better, and far more fair and workable solution might be the blending or mixture of many of Obamacare's parts-and-pieces with Medicaid, which has worked successfully since Johnson put it into existence in 1965. After all, Obamacare and Medicaid are already "birds of a feather". Making a "Bird Chili" out of both of them might work well....

Again, as all of us, Left and Right, can agree, someone has to pay for all this. It won't be the rich, who employ armies of tax attorneys and tax accountants to make certain that the wealthy go on paying little or nothing toward any 'national' program. The poor can't pay... they simply have their hands out to the rest of us -- but, they wield power because they are fully empowered to VOTE. That leaves the middle-class... perhaps you and me, to pay for everything. Any new system, or major transformation must first be fair to those of us who are going to have to PAY, or it isn't worth a damn, and, it won't be financially viable.