Obamacare Lite

[anatess2]

I've been pushing and pushing and pushing for Paul Ryan because I really believed he was the guy we need to shape up Congress.  My faith in him is shaken today.

WHAT THE CRAP DID THEY JUST PUSH???  Rand Paul is RIGHT - IT IS OBAMACARE LITE!   Even the stupid individual mandate is still in it!  There's not even ANYTHING... NONE, NADA... that addresses the market forces!  No opening of markets across state lines that Ryan himself was saying will be in the bill.

Of course, the Democrats, to no surprise to anybody, immediately billed this as - Healthcare for the Rich.  Idiots.  But, the Democrats will be happy with this.  Because this bill would be DEAD ON ARRIVAL. 

So, Trump praised the bill as a wonderful bill.  Well, yes, it's more wonderful than the hopeless Obamacare and it starts the process of negotiation, I get it. But, there's no need to go duke this bill out on the floor.  Throw this stupid thing back to committee... no, throw it into the fireplace, and start from scratch.  No, don't start from scratch.  Go get Rand Paul's bill and start there.

Grrr.   DRAIN THE SWAMP!

[askandanswer]

9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Grrr.   DRAIN THE SWAMP!

And then where would Gator live?

[anatess2]

Just now, askandanswer said:

And then where would Gator live?

On the compound.  Zil made a moat around it so Gator can be useful.

[Guest Godless]

From what I understand, the individual mandate was altered. There's now no penalty for not having insurance.... until you buy insurance, at which point the insurance companies will charge you an additional premium due to your lapse in coverage. Because mandate through taxation = socialism, while mandate through corporate fees = FREEDOM!!! Doesn't Trump realize that corporate favoritism is how the swamp was created in the first place? 

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

From what I understand, the individual mandate was altered. There's now no penalty for not having insurance.... until you buy insurance, at which point the insurance companies will charge you an additional premium due to your lapse in coverage. Because mandate through taxation = socialism, while mandate through corporate fees = FREEDOM!!! Doesn't Trump realize that corporate favoritism is how the swamp was created in the first place? 

You think Trump wrote this stupid piece of dung?

[Guest Godless]

Just now, anatess2 said:

You think Trump wrote this stupid piece of dung?

No, but that didn't stop him from singing its praises as soon as it was released rather than taking a stand against the swamp creatures who wrote it. If by some miracle this trainwreck of a bill actually clears Congress, I'll be very surprised if Trump doesn't sign it into law. And if (when) it fails, he as another thing to blame Democrats and "fake news" for, even though it'll most likely be the GOP that kills this bill.

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, Godless said:

No, but that didn't stop him from singing its praises as soon as it was released rather than taking a stand against the swamp creatures who wrote it. If by some miracle this trainwreck of a bill actually clears Congress, I'll be very surprised if Trump doesn't sign it into law. And if (when) it fails, he as another thing to blame Democrats and "fake news" for, even though it'll most likely be the GOP that kills this bill.

He didn't sing its praises for its merit.  He sung its praises because it's now THERE so can be negotiated.  It's forward progress.  You can't negotiate something that doesn't exist.  He sang praises for Rand Paul's bill too.  And they're night and day.   But yes, if I was Trump, I wouldn't bother negotiating this thing.  I'm telling them straight off - go back to scratch, watch my Speech to the Joint Congress AGAIN and AGAIN until you understand the guide rails I gave you on it.

One thing the Republicans have going for them is they're not mind-numbed robots like the Democrats who rubber-stamped a healthcare bill they haven't even read.  At least Republicans are out there arguing about it.

Edited March 7, 2017 by anatess2

[JohnsonJones]

I think the number one item I am opposed to in the ACA is taxing someone simply for being alive (aka, the individual mandate).  Men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit to happiness.

NO ONE should be taxed simply for the privilege to life, or to be alive.  I feel that is wrong.

Other than that, I think there are many things in the ACA that are commendable.  The problem is finding a way to fund those items.  I think a major problem with it is relying on the virtue of people and thinking that for profit companies are going to be the solution.  Unless we start treating healthcare differently, there is no way to ensure good treatment for everyone while keeping the costs lower.  AS long as politicians are in the pockets of the drug companies and the medical community, healthcare costs will remain high while healthcare in the US continues to fall in how useful it is to anyone who is not made of money.

[wenglund]

My concern is that too many of us continue to look to the government (even in a lite way) to solve the healthcare problem, when it is the government that caused the problem to begin with.  Even government-created health savings plans are ill advised. And, while taking care of the health of the poor is noble,  putting that responsibility in the hands of the government assures it will become ignoble.

My other concern is with the notion of insurance--specifically how it morphed from insuring against catastrophic events to a 3rd-party payment program covering most all healthcare needs. And, how it morphed from a convenience to a personal right. Putin a parti with its own interests in-between the consumer and the healthcare business, is a recipe for disaster.

But, what to do now that government and "insurance" have been substantially interwoven into the fabric of the healthcare cloth? How to remove them without destroying the cloth?

At this point, I don't know that it can be done. We may be faced with the prospects of muddling along and tinkering at the edges with what we currently have, or letting the cloth disintegrate and weave a new cloth via the free market--kind of like how things worked before the government got involved.

I vote for the later, and I hear that the market has already devised some patterns and have even successfully tested some cloth:

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[yjacket]

On 3/7/2017 at 0:15 PM, anatess2 said:

I've been pushing and pushing and pushing for Paul Ryan because I really believed he was the guy we need to shape up Congress.  My faith in him is shaken today.

WHAT THE CRAP DID THEY JUST PUSH???  Rand Paul is RIGHT - IT IS OBAMACARE LITE!   Even the stupid individual mandate is still in it!  There's not even ANYTHING... NONE, NADA... that addresses the market forces!  No opening of markets across state lines that Ryan himself was saying will be in the bill.

Of course, the Democrats, to no surprise to anybody, immediately billed this as - Healthcare for the Rich.  Idiots.  But, the Democrats will be happy with this.  Because this bill would be DEAD ON ARRIVAL. 

So, Trump praised the bill as a wonderful bill.  Well, yes, it's more wonderful than the hopeless Obamacare and it starts the process of negotiation, I get it. But, there's no need to go duke this bill out on the floor.  Throw this stupid thing back to committee... no, throw it into the fireplace, and start from scratch.  No, don't start from scratch.  Go get Rand Paul's bill and start there.

Grrr.   DRAIN THE SWAMP!

Anatess,

Welcome to the Dark Side. Are you awake yet?  Are you aware yet? Are your eyes open so you can see?

2 sides of the exact, same coin.  Republicrats and Demicans.  Washington DC doesn't have two parties, it is one party and it is the Leviathan, the Deep State, people who are in power who's only objective is to get gain. Call it the Gadianton Robbers, The Powers That Be, the Illuminati, The New World Order.  Call it whatever you want, but it's not conservatism.

There are very, very few members of Congress who are actually small government conservatives. The Freedom Caucus is a good starting place and then cut that in half and that's about how many are actually freedom-loving.  There might be a total of 10-20 members of Congress (House&Senate) who are actual conservatives, the rest are just big government cronies.  Whether they are democrat or republican it doesn't really matter.  The Rs give good lip service, but when push comes to shove they are just as war-hungry, just as much big government, deficit spending, less freedom, more State power and control than the Ds.

Paul Ryan is part of The Insiders, the CFR, the globalists, he is one of them.  No way, they would let the 2nd most powerful position in the government be filled by a person who actually believed in limited government!

Trump was a big hick-up as they didn't expect him to win-Hillary was it-they misjudged him.  The question is will Trump become one of them or not? 

[Sunday21]

I have a very nice guest room. Just saying. ??

[anatess2]

11 hours ago, yjacket said:

Anatess,

Welcome to the Dark Side. Are you awake yet?  Are you aware yet? Are your eyes open so you can see?

2 sides of the exact, same coin.  Republicrats and Demicans.  Washington DC doesn't have two parties, it is one party and it is the Leviathan, the Deep State, people who are in power who's only objective is to get gain. Call it the Gadianton Robbers, The Powers That Be, the Illuminati, The New World Order.  Call it whatever you want, but it's not conservatism.

There are very, very few members of Congress who are actually small government conservatives. The Freedom Caucus is a good starting place and then cut that in half and that's about how many are actually freedom-loving.  There might be a total of 10-20 members of Congress (House&Senate) who are actual conservatives, the rest are just big government cronies.  Whether they are democrat or republican it doesn't really matter.  The Rs give good lip service, but when push comes to shove they are just as war-hungry, just as much big government, deficit spending, less freedom, more State power and control than the Ds.

Paul Ryan is part of The Insiders, the CFR, the globalists, he is one of them.  No way, they would let the 2nd most powerful position in the government be filled by a person who actually believed in limited government!

Trump was a big hick-up as they didn't expect him to win-Hillary was it-they misjudged him.  The question is will Trump become one of them or not? 

This is true in one sense and false in another  - false in Paul Ryan especially.  Paul Ryan is Establishment as such that he is a policy wonk.  He is a strict lawman.  Process, process, process.  This is why I supported him throughout his bickering with Trump even worked to help him win over the Trumpster Nehlen.  Because if there's anybody who knows how Congress is SUPPOSED TO work and has tirelessly tried to get it working in that manner, it is Paul Ryan.  Paul Ryan is a true conservative (where Romney was not) but his ideology falls second place to PROCESS.  That's why I believe he will work perfectly with the Trump wrecking ball.  Trump wrecks the broken Congress, Ryan puts it back together into how it is SUPPOSED to work.

Okay, so Ryan explained the healthcare bill in his wonky style shown in the video below.  So, ok, it makes sense now.  Notice the adherence to PROCESS.  The limitations of the Senate worked into the solution, the power of the HHS worked into the solution, the big haul of Republicans in Congress worked into the solution.   So, ok, I now understand that this bill is NOT the entire healthcare bill.  It is simply the part of the healthcare bill that can be moved through the Budget Reconciliation PROCESS.  Tom Price will work on the market, then Congress will submit the rest of the legislation through the regular legislation route, canvassing a majority vote in the House and a super-majority vote in the Senate.  The problem here is... if that 3rd piece doesn't push through, the Republicans own the entire failed thing, lock, stock, and barrel.  So, this 3rd step is going to be used by Republicans for the 2018 elections to drum up votes.

So, basically, Ryan saying - this is how it can pass through the PROCESS.  Okay, I understand that.  But that's cowardly.  You are assuming Democrats can't be swayed to the RIGHT THING to do.  You already gave up before you even started!  The CORRECT PROCESS, Mr. Ryan, is to write the full bill, let it sink or swim in its own merit in the Senate and if Trump can't drum up 8 Democrat votes to ease the pain of Obamacare and the bill fails to pass, THEN you skewer them in the elections but, in the meantime, you can pull this 3-part process out of your drawer and get it done.  As it stands, you got 80 Congressional Republicans that has to be wined and dined to go along with this risky business instead of just 8 Democrats.  And, as it stands, you got angry Republican voters you have to appease.  Idiots.

 

 

 

[JohnsonJones]

So someone expanded on the individual mandate of the Ryan Care/Republicans idea and after hearing what it actually was (instead of what the media is reporting) it actually isn't that bad.

If you do not have insurance, but then get it through an employer, or sign up during an open window (normally 30-60 days a year), or and a qualifying life event, you do NOT PAY THE PENALTY.

The 30% penalty are for those that drop it and then start it up again without any of the above factors.  This is specifically to prevent people from not having insurance and then deciding to get it AFTER they get sick.

In addition, that 30% penalty only lasts 12 months and then you revert back to normal premiums.

I can actually live with that.  The way the media was portraying it was FAR different, more like how it is today which is basically a tax because you were born, which I absolutely disagree with.

[Guest MormonGator]

[yjacket]

6 hours ago, anatess2 said:

 Paul Ryan is a true conservative (where Romney was not) but his ideology falls second place to PROCESS. 

I guess I was wrong, you're not awake yet. . . maybe one day.

The Republicans control both houses with a majority.  They can do WHATEVER THEY WANT! Filibuster or not, they just need 50 votes in the House.  And you believe Ryan's "process" crap (they are only working 8 days in April). . . oh well, I guess not enough people are awake yet.

Very sad, people still actually think there is a dime's worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats.

[yjacket]

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

So someone expanded on the individual mandate of the Ryan Care/Republicans idea and after hearing what it actually was (instead of what the media is reporting) it actually isn't that bad.

If you do not have insurance, but then get it through an employer, or sign up during an open window (normally 30-60 days a year), or and a qualifying life event, you do NOT PAY THE PENALTY.

The 30% penalty are for those that drop it and then start it up again without any of the above factors.  This is specifically to prevent people from not having insurance and then deciding to get it AFTER they get sick.

In addition, that 30% penalty only lasts 12 months and then you revert back to normal premiums.

I can actually live with that.  The way the media was portraying it was FAR different, more like how it is today which is basically a tax because you were born, which I absolutely disagree with.

So sad that in 3 years we went from no penalty to where people can actually live with a 30% tax just b/c you don't have health care and then want to sign up.

The road to Serfdom.  Just remember folks the income tax was first passed it was only 1% on income over 10k (over 1million today).

[yjacket]

Hey here's a brilliant idea you idiotic Rs in Congress (that are really wolves in sheep clothing) how about you pass the same blasted repeal you passed something like 30+ times in the House.  Or was all that just really political bluster and you guys are simply cowards (or worse Democrat lites).

[anatess2]

7 hours ago, yjacket said:

I guess I was wrong, you're not awake yet. . . maybe one day.

The Republicans control both houses with a majority.  They can do WHATEVER THEY WANT! Filibuster or not, they just need 50 votes in the House.  And you believe Ryan's "process" crap (they are only working 8 days in April). . . oh well, I guess not enough people are awake yet.

Very sad, people still actually think there is a dime's worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats.

What use is House Bill when you can't get it passed in the Senate?  Nothing.  It's nothing but bragging points on an election campaign because it goes NOWHERE.  Process!

And Congress only "works 8 days in April" because they're not supposed to camp in Washington!  They're supposed to camp in their own States!  What's the point of a representative who spends most of his time away from the people he represents?  A representative is supposed to work more outside of Washington than in it.  Process!

You think I'm asleep?  I'm not even American and I study this sh&&!  You, on the other hand, are letting your right-wing whiners do the thinking for you.

Edited March 11, 2017 by anatess2

[yjacket]

10 hours ago, anatess2 said:

What use is House Bill when you can't get it passed in the Senate?  Nothing.  It's nothing but bragging points on an election campaign because it goes NOWHERE.  Process!

And Congress only "works 8 days in April" because they're not supposed to camp in Washington!  They're supposed to camp in their own States!  What's the point of a representative who spends most of his time away from the people he represents?  A representative is supposed to work more outside of Washington than in it.  Process!

You think I'm asleep?  I'm not even American and I study this sh&&!  You, on the other hand, are letting your right-wing whiners do the thinking for you.

Lol .  . What part about the Republicans control the House, Senate and White House do you not understand?  There is no need for any Democrats.  They do not have to compromise at all!! Yes the Senate has the "filibuster", but that is really just a myth-the Senate only needs 50 votes, not 60.  So the Ds filibuster, so they filibuster for 1 day, 2 days, big flipping deal.  The longest filibuster in history was a little over 24 hours.  For someone who claims they study this stuff . . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate

Yes you are asleep.  They work 8 days in April, there was already an election 4 months ago! The new Congress was put in 2 months ago.  The people already spoke on what they need to do!  Now, if it was this time next year (or even late this year)-fine I can buy that excuse to "connect with the people".  

The people spoke on what Congress needs to do . . .REPEAL OBAMACARE.  For them to show up, for a month, do pretty much absolutely nothing with a new President, then leave go home and sit on their butts is the height of hypocrisy.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?congress=115&status=28,29,32,33

An 8 whopping bills!  2 are about promoting women, 1 is a GAO bill.  Only one bill actually appears to do anything for less government.  And one bill grows government

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr39/summary

And like I said 17 members of the Freedom Caucus voted against it-those guys are about the only true patriots and Conservatives in Congress.

Clearly you do not understand how incredibly corrupt the system is, so yes you are asleep and clueless as to how the system actually works.

Paul Ryan is anything but a conservative, he's a democrat in Republican clothes.

Lol, letting the right-wingers do the research for me . ..that's a good one.  I see things as they really are, not as I hope or wish them to be.

And the naked truth is that Trump was never supposed to win the election (he is an Independent outside of the political parties and machine), the Machine will do everything they can to frustrate him and this is what it looks like.  Expect more of this.  If the Rs keep it up, they will lose one branch of government in 2 years.

[anatess2]

10 hours ago, yjacket said:

Lol .  . What part about the Republicans control the House, Senate and White House do you not understand?  There is no need for any Democrats.  They do not have to compromise at all!! Yes the Senate has the "filibuster", but that is really just a myth-the Senate only needs 50 votes, not 60.  So the Ds filibuster, so they filibuster for 1 day, 2 days, big flipping deal.  The longest filibuster in history was a little over 24 hours.  For someone who claims they study this stuff . . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate

Yes you are asleep.  They work 8 days in April, there was already an election 4 months ago! The new Congress was put in 2 months ago.  The people already spoke on what they need to do!  Now, if it was this time next year (or even late this year)-fine I can buy that excuse to "connect with the people".  

The people spoke on what Congress needs to do . . .REPEAL OBAMACARE.  For them to show up, for a month, do pretty much absolutely nothing with a new President, then leave go home and sit on their butts is the height of hypocrisy.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?congress=115&status=28,29,32,33

An 8 whopping bills!  2 are about promoting women, 1 is a GAO bill.  Only one bill actually appears to do anything for less government.  And one bill grows government

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr39/summary

And like I said 17 members of the Freedom Caucus voted against it-those guys are about the only true patriots and Conservatives in Congress.

Clearly you do not understand how incredibly corrupt the system is, so yes you are asleep and clueless as to how the system actually works.

Paul Ryan is anything but a conservative, he's a democrat in Republican clothes.

Lol, letting the right-wingers do the research for me . ..that's a good one.  I see things as they really are, not as I hope or wish them to be.

And the naked truth is that Trump was never supposed to win the election (he is an Independent outside of the political parties and machine), the Machine will do everything they can to frustrate him and this is what it looks like.  Expect more of this.  If the Rs keep it up, they will lose one branch of government in 2 years.

No.  The Senate needs 60 votes to pass legislation.  It's how it is SUPPOSED TO BE.  It is supposed to be difficult to pass new law in the United States of America because the power of the Federal Government is supposed to be very limited against the collective States.  You crap on that rule like Reid did and you end up with the Deep State like you have now.  So your response to corruption is TO CRAP ON THE ONLY PERSON THAT HAS ANY HOPE OF BREAKING THE POLITIICAL ESTABLISHMENT and eliminate the Filibuster on legislation.  Why don't you just go take one of your nukes and bomb your own country?  There's not much difference.

Why do you think I went all out supporting Trump?  I'VE BEEN TRYING TO WAKE YOU GUYS UP FOR A YEAR!

Edited March 12, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

Okay, just so we are clear on my beef on Obamacare Lite.

Trump is doing exactly what I want him to do.  Render the Democrat and the Media powerless and take apart the Republican Party.  Done and doing it.

Ryan is doing exactly what I want him to do.  Trump breaks up the existing gridlock by completely disrespecting partisanship, breaks every "but it's always been done that way" political inefficiencies, and puts a megawatt spotlight on the Government therefore freeing up Ryan to put the CORRECT process back into the House and, by extension, the entire Congress which he is doing as expected.

Now, where my beef is - Ryan, in my opinion, is going the inferior but "easier" CORRECT process instead of the going the superior but more "difficult" CORRECT process to resolve the Healthcare access issues plaguing the country.  That, in my opinion, is a display of a LACK of COURAGE and NOT a display of not wanting to do the right thing for the American people.  Ryan needs to put more faith in Trump's ability to bring Democrats to the table, even as he has no faith in McConnell, instead of planning around an All-Republican solution.  The implosion of Obamacare is a big wave they can ride to get Democrats on that table!

It's a good thing that many Republicans - the ones with more courage - are pushing back on it.  So yes, the process needs to play out and we'll see who gets to convince who of how it needs to be done.  There are 2 ways I want this bill to go - either this bill dies, or this bill intended to go through budge resolution gets voted on TOGETHER with the rest of the healthcare legislation (that nobody has seen yet - so it better have all the provisions of the market-based healthcare vision or it needs to just die too).

 

 

 

 

[yjacket]

On 3/11/2017 at 9:50 PM, anatess2 said:

No.  The Senate needs 60 votes to pass legislation.  It's how it is SUPPOSED TO BE.

Anatess, I'm glad that you have a pretty good grasp of America, it's politics, etc. but you are just flat our wrong on this one. You absolutely do not need 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. And no, that is not how it's supposed to be.

You only need 60 votes to end debate (if the debate continues), which are two completely different things. You only need 50 votes to pass legislation in the Senate; that's it, no more, no less. The Rs could turn this into a great win for them.  Repeal Obamacare, then blame the Ds for being obstruction b/c they won't vote to end debate even though a majority of the Senate will pass the bill (and if they did it right, they could easily turn enough heat to flip some Ds.)

You are just flat out wrong. The Rs again do not need to compromise to replace ObamaCare.  

And if the Paul Ryan, establishment non-conservatives types actually cared about repealing it, they could easily frame the discussion around the Ds, instead of this putrid pile of garbage. And secondly, Paul Ryan isn't even in the Senate.

The right process (since you are so concerned about the process, but continue to ignore the wolves in sheep clothing), is for the House to pass it's version of Repeal, then the Senate gets to vote on it, if they don't vote on it then you have revise the bill.  But you start off at the best negotiating position (i.e. full Repeal), not some stupid ObamaCare lite that will make the entire situation much, much worse. And if on some small chance you can't get full Repeal through the Senate, then you do like Trump said, blame the whole stinking mess on the Ds-rather than pass some half-baked legislation.

You can take my words to the bank, the ultimate goal is a single-payer system provide by and managed by the US government.  It will end up being a withholding on your W2. And Ryan is more concerned about making that happen (he is part of the Insiders afterall) than about limited government.  See, if this fails, like it will, like it's designed to to, both the Rs and the Ds can say, See we've tried it the right way and it just didn't work, so lets have a single-payer.

Edited March 14, 2017 by yjacket

[anatess2]

9 minutes ago, yjacket said:

Anatess, I'm glad that you have a pretty good grasp of America, it's politics, etc. but you are just flat our wrong on this one. You absolutely do not need 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. And no, that is not how it's supposed to be.

You only need 60 votes to end debate (if the debate continues), which are two completely different things. You only need 50 votes to pass legislation in the Senate; that's it, no more, no less. The Rs could turn this into a great win for them.  Repeal Obamacare, then blame the Ds for being obstruction b/c they won't vote to end debate even though a majority of the Senate will pass the bill (and if they did it right, they could easily turn enough heat to flip some Ds.)

You are just flat out wrong. The Rs again do not need to compromise to replace ObamaCare.  

And if the Paul Ryan, establishment non-conservatives types actually cared about repealing it, they could easily frame the discussion around the Ds, instead of this putrid pile of garbage. And secondly, Paul Ryan isn't even in the Senate.

The right process (since you are so concerned about the process, but continue to ignore the wolves in sheep clothing), is for the House to pass it's version of Repeal, then the Senate gets to vote on it, if they don't vote on it then you have revise the bill.  But you start off at the best negotiating position (i.e. full Repeal), not some stupid ObamaCare lite that will make the entire situation much, much worse.

You can take my words to the bank, the ultimate goal is a single-payer system provide by and managed by the US government.  It will end up being a withholding on your W2. And Ryan is more concerned about making that happen (he is part of the Insiders afterall) than about limited government.  See, if this fails, like it will, like it's designed to to, both the Rs and the Ds can say, See we've tried it the right way and it just didn't work, so lets have a single-payer.

Po-tay-toes, Po-tah-toes.  "Who gets the blame" is such a pre-Trump corrupt government partisan mentality.  So is the "no compromise with the other party" mentality.  That's the mentality that got you where you are by January 19, 2017.

Yes, House Repeals, Senate Repeals, it goes to Trump to Repeal.  But that's not what Trump wants.  He campaigned on Repeal AND Replace.  He campaigned on - no daylight between them.  Repealing Obamacare does not solve the healthcare problem that necessitated the Healthcare Debate that led to Obamacare in the first place.  Healthcare is broken.  Going from Obamacare back to broken pre-Obamacare days is better but STILL broken.  Trump's mantra is Make America Great Again.  Not Make America pre-Obama Again.

The Democrat goal is single-payer.  That's not the Republican goal.  If it was, you'd have single-payer in 2009 instead of having ZERO Republican signatures on Obamacare.  Ryan may be Establishment but he is A PATRIOT.  Remember his vision of privatizing Social Security?  Remember that?

 

[wenglund]

I don't wish to be pessimistic, but even if Trumpcare is entirely market-based, it won't eliminate two huge government healthcare programs (Medicare and Medicade), that account for nearly a third of all healthcare expenditures, and amount to more than a trillion dollars per year. (see HERE) This government-based gorilla in the healthcare room, will continue to wreck havoc on medical costs and the way we do medical business, if not also provide a bottomless well of political capital to further socialize the system. For whatever reason, the well intended useful idiocy of the electorate seems to view the abject failures of government programs as reason to expand government involvement.  You can't really fight against that. At best, whatever comes out of congress in the next while will have temporary, if not negligable positive impact. I hope I am wrong.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[anatess2]

12 minutes ago, wenglund said:

I don't wish to be pessimistic, but even if Trumpcare is entirely market-based, it won't eliminate two huge government healthcare programs (Medicare and Medicade), that account for nearly a third of all healthcare expenditures, and amount to more than a trillion dollars per year. (see HERE) This government-based gorilla in the healthcare room, will continue to wreck havoc on medical costs and the way we do medical business, if not also provide a bottomless well of political capital to further socialize the system. For whatever reason, the well intended useful idiocy of the electorate seems to view the abject failures of government programs as reason to expand government involvement.  You can't really fight against that. At best, whatever comes out of congress in the next while will have temporary, if not negligable positive impact. I hope I am wrong.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The Republican bill eliminates the Medicaid Expansion from Obamacare.  It also puts a cap on the Medicaid Federal matching.  It does not address Medicare - Trump and Ryan are on opposing views on that one.  Ryan wants to overhaul Medicare, open it up to higher premiums or later retirement age, and even privatizing in addition to structural changes on fee schedule calculations, etc.  Trump doesn't want it touched.  I side with Ryan on this.  Trump believes improving the economy alone will increase Medicare revenues to keep it financially stable.  I disagree.  I agree with Ryan that the structural problems of Medicare is such that any increase in revenue will not solve the problem.

In any case, pushing for a market-based healthcare solution overall would drive costs down without doctors having to abide by a convoluted fee schedule dictated by government.  This paradigm would also creep into the cost of healthcare covered under Medicare and Medicaid.  The leverage of HSA would also creep into Medicare and Medicaid.