Trump's Promises

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

OH MY GOSH!  I think that's one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen -- outside of some of Mirkwood's Halloween posts :).

The more you look at it, the more artistic and funny it is. 

[Just_A_Guy]

20 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

Apropos of nothing in particular:

 

[unixknight]

I think we need to be honest and stop calling it "insurance."  Insurance is supposed to be a policy that protects someone from catastrophic financial loss due to unforeseen circumstances.  This is what car insurance is, homeowner's insurance, etc.  This used to be what health insurance was, but is no longer.

A few decades ago, you only used health insurance when something big and expensive happened, like needing surgery or breaking an arm.  Regular checkups and routine doctor visits were paid for out of pocket and weren't very expensive at all.  At some point, the insurance companies decided to start covering those routine checkups because, they concluded, if we encourage people to do a better job of looking after their own health by seeing a doctor regularly, it will save costs on covering the big problems that could be avoided through more diligent care.

The problem started when people became used to the idea that their health insurance plan ought to cover absolutely everything medical related.  Now we just expect our health plans to cover every single interaction we have with a doctor.  At the same time, because of all the paperwork associated with filing insurance claims as well ad Medicaid/Medicare claims, as well as the rising cost of malpractice insurance, the costs of healthcare have skyrocketed.  I had a friend whose wife worked in a doctor's office and they had something like a dozen full time employees whose only job was to handle filing Medicare paperwork.  That's it.  Go figure these costs added to the price of a doctor visit.

What's that got to do with ObamaCare and Trump?  Everything.  It set us up to feel entitled to have pre-existing conditions covered by insurance.  This is only really a problem because of the extreme costs of healthcare.  If it weren't so high, ongoing treatments for many pre-existing problems wouldn't be such a massive burden.  So now people expect their healthcare plan to cover it like everything else.  The problem is that isn't how insurance works.  Taking on a new insurance plan and expecting it to cover pre-existing conditions is like buying car insurance and then expecting them to cover the repairs for an accident that happened a week ago.

So ObamaCare forces health "insurance" companies to cover them anyway.  How do you pay for that?  An insurance company stays in business by paying out less than it takes in.  It's a gamble that most of its members won't need expensive treatments so that they can afford the ones that do.  What happens when people come in to it already costing more money than they're paying in?  Is it a problem?  Of course it is.  Who's more likely to buy health insurance?  A person who's sick, or a person who isn't?  The sick person, of course.  So how do you get more people to pay in without taking money out?  Simple.  You force healthy people to buy in.

Hello, ObamaCare.  To sweeten the deal for the American public they also  threw in all kinds of mandatory coverage like birth control pills, etc.

So I really don't see how Trump can push to take out any of the significant parts without unraveling the whole.  Sure, he may be able to get Congress to remove some of the specific little requirements like making religious institutions pay for contraceptives and abortions, but will Congress have the guts to repeal it entirely?  I doubt it. 

Can we please stop talking as if Trump has the power to repeal ObamaCare?  He doesn't.  As President he can't repeal a law, that's what Congress does.  The most he can do is propose a budget to defund it, but it's up to Congress to accept or reject it.  The only other mechanism would have been the Supreme Court but it has already ruled ObamaCare is Constitutional.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Can we please stop talking as if Trump has the power to repeal ObamaCare?  He doesn't.  As President he can't repeal a law, that's what Congress does.  The most he can do is propose a budget to defund it, but it's up to Congress to accept or reject it.  The only other mechanism would have been the Supreme Court but it has already ruled ObamaCare is Constitutional.

Actually, the law has that power built into it.  It specifically states that the Executive Branch has the power to grant waivers to anyone and everyone.  So, the President does have the power to grant a waiver to everyone, every government entity, and every business entity by fiat.

[anatess2]

43 minutes ago, unixknight said:

So I really don't see how Trump can push to take out any of the significant parts without unraveling the whole.  Sure, he may be able to get Congress to remove some of the specific little requirements like making religious institutions pay for contraceptives and abortions, but will Congress have the guts to repeal it entirely?  I doubt it.

Congress has repealed it.  Obama vetoed it.  Of course.  Now, the people who put Republicans in Congress overwhelmingly in 2010 and again in 2012 and 2014 wanted more than just the token - "See, we repealed it but Obama vetoed it so it didn't go through" excuse for Obamacare still being there.  They were demanding that Congress use their "power of the purse" to defund it so even as it didn't get repealed it would still be d.e.a.d.  But Congress failed in that effort because - they don't want to shut down government.

On January 20, Congress can repeal it again.  But Trump will not sign it unless it comes with a replacement bill.  He has expressed several times including one just a couple weeks ago on a press interview that there will not be a lapse between the repeal of Obamacare to the replacement of Obamacare - they will go simultaneously.  The replacement Bill passed the house last year but got stuck in the Senate.  They're still working on it.  Trump wants his own platform ideas put in it, so they're going to have to go back to square 1 on that replacement Bill.  This is a good thing - because Trump's ideas include the HSA to replace/supplement insurance so that insurance can, once again, only have to apply to catastrophic illnesses including pre-existing conditions of such catastrophic illnesses instead of mandating that insurance covers for everything and the kitchen sink.

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

But Trump will not sign it unless it comes with a replacement bill.

Therein lies the rub.  That specifically means he won't repeal it.

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Therein lies the rub.  That specifically means he won't repeal it.

Seriously?  You don't understand the concept of - REPEAL AND REPLACE?  By the way, Trump can't repeal it.  CONGRESS has to repeal it.  Congress also has to replace it.  Congress has a lot of work to do that's why I have been campaigning in support of Paul Ryan even as he fights with Trump.  Trump/Ryan is the perfect combination.  Now we will see how Trump can bring together a divided Congress (and I'm not just talking about Repubs and Dems...)

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Therein lies the rub.  That specifically means he won't repeal it.

Indeed.  As immensely complex as ObamaCare is, any replacement is going to take time, even if they try to make it simpler.  I think we need to focus more on lowering healthcare costs rather than these crazy, complex mechanisms for somehow trying to make an expensive thing available cheaply by having the Government pay for it without raising taxes...

Yes, it's as stupid as it sounds but this is what we're trying to do. 

Edited November 29, 2016 by unixknight

[anatess2]

10 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Indeed.  As immensely complex as ObamaCare is, any replacement is going to take time, even if they try to make it simpler.  I think we need to focus more on lowering healthcare costs rather than these crazy, complex mechanisms for somehow trying to make an expensive thing available cheaply by having the Government pay for it without raising taxes...

Yes, it's as stupid as it sounds but this is what we're trying to do. 

Sigh.

THE BILL is the mechanism that WILL LOWER healthcare costs.  The Bill includes taking out regulations that is currently preventing the healthcare industry from benefiting from a capitalistic paradigm.  And yes, it includes regulations for safety nets without strapping it to the backs of private hospital ERs and Employers.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Sigh.

THE BILL is the mechanism that WILL LOWER healthcare costs.  The Bill includes taking out regulations that is currently preventing the healthcare industry from benefiting from a capitalistic paradigm.

What BILL?  Has someone drafted it yet?

And yes, regulations are a factor but not the only one.  The expense of healthcare didn't just happen overnight.

[anatess2]

9 minutes ago, unixknight said:

What BILL?  Has someone drafted it yet?

And yes, regulations are a factor but not the only one.  The expense of healthcare didn't just happen overnight.

YES.  The House did.  Twice.  And passed.  Twice.  It failed in the Senate - including the Republican majority one.  No, I don't like the house bills either.  But they're better than Obamacare at least.  Now Paul Ryan is working on a better replacement and hopefully he's heeding Carson's input.  We'll see what he comes up with.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Seriously?  You don't understand the concept of - REPEAL AND REPLACE?  By the way, Trump can't repeal it.  CONGRESS has to repeal it.  Congress also has to replace it.  Congress has a lot of work to do that's why I have been campaigning in support of Paul Ryan even as he fights with Trump.  Trump/Ryan is the perfect combination.  Now we will see how Trump can bring together a divided Congress (and I'm not just talking about Repubs and Dems...)

No, I understand it perfectly.  It means no repeal.  

(This is not an attack on Trump specifically) Everyone seems to still be on the bandwagon that government should be involved in healthcare.  What's the difference between one person's plan vs another's?  Any government plan will not be done by free market principles and will therefore be a mess.  If you believe government should be involved in healthcare and the individual mandate is required, I'm against it.  I don't care if it were Obama, Clinton, Trump, Romney, or even Cruz.  I'd be against it.

Unless the individual mandate is gone, it essentially means no repeal.  That is what everyone simply doesn't get.

What I'd be ok with is this:

1) No individual mandate.

2) Insurance companies be allowed to offer plans that are non-compliant to those who want it.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Guest

[unixknight]

7 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

YES.  The House did.  Twice.  And passed.  Twice.  It failed in the Senate - including the Republican majority one.  No, I don't like the house bills either.  But they're better than Obamacare at least.  Now Paul Ryan is working on a better replacement and hopefully he's heeding Carson's input.  We'll see what he comes up with.

Ok so THE BILL doesn't currently exist and Paul Ryan is working on a new one.  That's fine.  I'll be worried if it's rushed into play though.

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

No, I understand it perfectly.  It means no repeal.  

(This is not an attack on Trump specifically) Everyone seems to still be on the bandwagon that government should be involved in healthcare.  What's the difference between one person's plan vs another's?  Any government plan will not be done by free market principles and will therefore be a mess.  If you believe government should be involved in healthcare and the individual mandate is required, I'm against it.  I don't care if it were Obama, Clinton, Trump, Romney, or even Cruz.  I'd be against it.

Unless the individual mandate is gone, it essentially means no repeal.  That is what everyone simply doesn't get.

What I'd be ok with is this:

1) No individual mandate.

2) Insurance companies be allowed to offer plans that are non-compliant to those who want it.

GOVERNMENT NEEDS to be involved in Heatlchare because THEY MUCKED IT UP.  They have to fix it.  There is a reason that Healthcare in the US is a mess that needed to be solved.... WAAAAAAY back in Reagan's time.  Maybe even as far back as Carter.

The individual mandate is the LEAST of your worries.  That was an Obamacare addition.  That will BE GONE when Obamacare is repealed.  Including the Employer mandate.  NOBODY wants the mandate.  Not even the Democrats.  Remember Pelosi's - don't read it, just pass it... she knows it won't pass.  The Dem elites strongarmed their congress people to get that thing passed!  That's why it was sooooo frustrating for that mandate to be supported by the SCOTUS!

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

No, I understand it perfectly.  It means no repeal.  

(This is not an attack on Trump specifically) Everyone seems to still be on the bandwagon that government should be involved in healthcare.  What's the difference between one person's plan vs another's?  Any government plan will not be done by free market principles and will therefore be a mess.  If you believe government should be involved in healthcare and the individual mandate is required, I'm against it.  I don't care if it were Obama, Clinton, Trump, Romney, or even Cruz.  I'd be against it.

Unless the individual mandate is gone, it essentially means no repeal.  That is what everyone simply doesn't get.

This.  And the individual mandate cannot be removed unless the law doesn't force companies to cover pre-existing conditions... and that, I think, is going to be the sticking point.  With the massive cost of healthcare people with pre-existing conditions are screwed otherwise.  It locks people into jobs if they can't switch health plans, and Heaven help someone who loses their job involuntarily and is forced to switch health plans. 

That's a problem that needs fixing, but the solution of just passing a law to force companies to do it is idiotic.

[anatess2]

14 minutes ago, unixknight said:

This.  And the individual mandate cannot be removed unless the law doesn't force companies to cover pre-existing conditions...

One more time with feeling.... HSA!

... and removal of artificial barriers to competition including the forming of Groups.

 

If you have been an employee of a corporation - before Obamacare - you know that Group insurance for employers cover pre-existing conditions.  And I know this personally because I was 5 months pregnant when I became employed and the company insurance covered my entire pregnancy including the unpaid balances (I did not have insurance prior to being employed) for procedures done before I became an employee.  This is because they are a big Group.

Currently (before Obamacare) you can't form a Group outside of Corporations or non-Profit Organizations.  It is... regulated.  Unnecessarily.  Because some big-wig health insurance guy didn't want other insurance companies to compete in their "turf" and they have some deep pockets to buy off some congress people.  So... if you lose your job, goodbye to your pre-existing coverage.  It will cost you an arm and a leg.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

10 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

One more time with feeling.... HSA!

... and removal of artificial barriers to competition including the forming of Groups.

And who pays for the HSAs for low to no income people?

[zil]

And am I the only one who's noticed that Obamacare essentially requires people who otherwise would not have to file an income tax return to file an income tax return (since this is how the individual mandate is enforced)?  That alone is inspired of the devil.

[anatess2]

23 minutes ago, unixknight said:

And who pays for the HSAs for low to no income people?

HSA's - nobody.  That's a SAVINGS account.  Everybody has their own and you can pass it to your children or grandchildren or whoever gets to control your estate when you die.  The possibility of private institutions - like the Church or your birthday party guests - to contribute to your HSA - is exciting.  And... the possibility of people who win money like lottery winners or Las Vegas winners or Jeopardy! winners... can avoid the 40% tax on their winnings by putting it into their HSA... or instead of sending your earnings to Switzerland to avoid taxes you can, instead, put the money in the HSA to avoid tax penalty.  Wouldn't that be awesome?

Now, who gets to pay for the healthcare costs of poor folks who can't afford it and has no HSA money to their name?  The STATE.  This is already in place in Harris County, Texas and the entire state of Massachussets.  Before Obamacare.  Each State gets to figure it out on their own and come up with their own solution.  The Trump Plan is for the Feds to simply give bloc funds to the State to subsidize any plan they come up with.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

GOVERNMENT NEEDS to be involved in Heatlchare because THEY MUCKED IT UP.  They have to fix it.  There is a reason that Healthcare in the US is a mess that needed to be solved.... WAAAAAAY back in Reagan's time.  Maybe even as far back as Carter.

The individual mandate is the LEAST of your worries.  That was an Obamacare addition.  That will BE GONE when Obamacare is repealed.  Including the Employer mandate.  NOBODY wants the mandate.  Not even the Democrats.  Remember Pelosi's - don't read it, just pass it... she knows it won't pass.  The Dem elites strongarmed their congress people to get that thing passed!  That's why it was sooooo frustrating for that mandate to be supported by the SCOTUS!

I'm not going to address the first paragraph because I know we're simply not going to meet any kind of understanding.

The second paragraph -- if the mandate is repealed, great.  That is exactly what I said I wanted.  I just don't have the faith in Congress or Trump that you do in gettting it actually repealed.  But time will tell.  No use arguing about it.  If it doesn't happen, it will be as I predicted.  What will you think of Trump then?  If it does happen then I'll be very happy to be proven wrong.

[anatess2]

9 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm not going to address the first paragraph because I know we're simply not going to meet any kind of understanding.

 

Carb, this is the easy one to come to understanding.  It is simply... how was healthcare in the USA before Obamacare?  You think it was great?

My freshly-graduated-from-medical-school brother applied for medical residency in US hospitals.  He went through several interviews with several hospitals and he studied how hospitals work in the US.  He received an offer to practice residency for Memorial Hospital in GA.  He declined it and moved back to the Philippines.  He said... American Healthcare System is broken.  This was in 1995.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Carb, this is the easy one to come to understanding.  It is simply... how was healthcare in the USA before Obamacare?  You think it was great?

 

That question perfectly exemplifies why we won't come to an understanding.  That's not even the part we disagree on.

[anatess2]

16 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

That question perfectly exemplifies why we won't come to an understanding.  That's not even the part we disagree on.

What do we disagree on?  That the reason it was not great was because of a spiderweb of government regulations that cramps sections of the industry and a lack of regulations to cramp other sections of the same industry?

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

44 minutes ago, zil said:

And am I the only one who's noticed that Obamacare essentially requires people who otherwise would not have to file an income tax return to file an income tax return (since this is how the individual mandate is enforced)?  That alone is inspired of the devil.

If you are of a bracket such that you don't have to file an income tax return, you are also exempt from the individual mandate (or, technically, the Feds pays it for you), so you still don't have to file a return.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

26 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

 

The second paragraph -- if the mandate is repealed, great.  That is exactly what I said I wanted.  I just don't have the faith in Congress or Trump that you do in gettting it actually repealed.  But time will tell.  No use arguing about it.  If it doesn't happen, it will be as I predicted.  What will you think of Trump then?

Then he, with the rest of the Republicans failed.  Simple.  So we'll have to elect somebody else that we hope can do the job that 5 decades of Republicans have failed to do...

Same thing with immigration.

Same thing with trade.

Same thing with the rest of foreign policy.

People talk about Reagan like he is this great President.  And he was.  But, remember, Reagan failed in immigration.  Reagan failed in controlling the federal budget.  Reagan failed in healthcare.  etc. etc. etc.  I will even deign to say he failed in defeating communism.  I mean, if he succeeded, we wouldn't have Americans in power praising Fidel Castro today.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anatess2