fan_since79

Obamacare/Trumpcare Horror Stories

2,125 posts in this topic

Has anyone ever thought that the cost going up is caused by the insurance companies that are just using the excuse of the ACA to jack up their prices?

the better question is why didnt those who wrote obamacare consider this and create a rider preventing it ?  nevermind they were too busy expecmting themselves to worry about us.. silly me :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been nice if Obama provided healthcare for those who didn't have it without f'ing up the healthcare plans of those who already had it.

  Taylor, you must have missed the statement Harry Reid made a couple months back when he said the goal all along was to create a single payer system.  The government wants to control health care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That wasn't the quote at all Bruce. Nice try, though.

 

 

 

The quote in Las Vegas?  Yes, it was.

 

What you're referring to is his handlers requesting to explain what he meant.  The quote was 100% accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original goal for many was single payer, knowing that was a non-starter folks on the left started with public option as a compromise...which turned out to be unacceptable to many so they fell back to the individual mandate/healthcare proposals from the heritage foundation and was implemented by the eventual 2012 Republican nominee in Massachusettes...you know...what is now socialism and nothing short of the fall of American civilization...Obamacare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare was created to lock in more Dem votes.

 

If you mean...by helping provide affordable health insurance to tens of millions of uncovered, an undercovered, people...you are absolutely correct. People tend to vote for the party that does a good job, and doesn't decide to burn everything to the ground in an epic temper tantrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you mean...by helping provide affordable health insurance to tens of millions of uncovered, an undercovered, people...you are absolutely correct. People tend to vote for the party that does a good job, and doesn't decide to burn everything to the ground in an epic temper tantrum.

 

Both sides have let this happen.  Reps have just done a better job of looking more inept doing it.

 

For me, I'd just prefer a fix that helped people who couldn't get healthcare without affecting those of us who like ours just fine and without forcing people who don't want it yet to have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both sides have let this happen.  Reps have just done a better job of looking more inept doing it.

 

For me, I'd just prefer a fix that helped people who couldn't get healthcare without affecting those of us who like ours just fine and without forcing people who don't want it yet to have it.

 

Sorry MT, can't agree.

 

The Democrats have been pushing to have a conference for 6+months now, 18 times that offer has been rejected.

 

They've agreed on a Continuing Resolution at Sequester Levels, even less than the Paul Ryan Budget that the Republicans wanted.

 

They are being asked to dismantle the signature accomplishment of the party, for 6 weeks of a CR, at levels even the Republicans didn't dream of asking for. What happens in 6 weeks? They are forced to dismantle Medicare for another 6 weeks? Social Security for another 6 weeks after that?

 

The Republicans lost the last election. The Presidency, the Senate, and they lost the House vote by 1.5 million (gerrymandering baby!)...and because they know what they want is unpopular, and they can't get what they want using the normal legislative process, they've taken hostages. First it's the government shutdown and they've pretty much demanded that the Democrats institute Mitt Romney's economic agenda not to blow up the US and global economy. 

 

You don't see the Obama administration threatening to blow up the economy if they don't get gun legislation they want? Or immigration reform. One side is guilty of hostage negotiations at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's don't forget the biggest thorns in the side of the non-Obamacare people are the following:

 

*  It was sold as a cost-neutral or maybe even cost saving law.

 

* The single biggest law that is more far-reaching than any other law was never read, nor understood by those in favor of it.

 

* It was sold as a law that would be argued day and night on C-SPAN for us all to see.

 

*It was sold as a law that would allow people to keep their existing primary care doctor.

 

And now we are supposed to follow the Clinton plan - "Fund it and then fix it."  Nope, no one I know has faith that once funded it will be discussed and hashed out for existing problems.  If it is funded, it will move forward as the Libs wanted - single payer system with billions of costs thrown on top of the taxpaying public so that 30 million (I think that's the number) can get health care.  Medicare coverage is now being cut, whole costs go up.  A couple (my age) now find that it will cost them close to $700 more per month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare was created for one reason.  The physicians lobby cried hard to the Democrats and threw millions of dollars behind it.

 

Read it up and down, it is all to make doctors and pharma richer and insurance companies poorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Not random. Some don't want to fund the law because they think it won't work. And they want to put our economy in even more risk to get their way. They don't want to use the legislative process to get it off the books. Because they can't.

Edited by HaloMagic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That isn't ignoring the law.  Also, I don't believe the legislative process was even followed to pass it.  A majority of congress hadn't even read the law before voting on it.  I would also argue that that your statement about putting the economy in more risk is debatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • AngelsWin.com Ad-free Membership Options