Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2017 21:45:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by poetinahat on Mar 23, 2017 22:44:27 GMT -5
What of his vaunted negotiating skills if it doesn't? Will he try again?
And... what about Naomi?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2017 23:09:56 GMT -5
For the answer to these and other anxiety-provoking questions, tune in tomorrow for the next exciting episode of "As the Stomach Churns."
(In all seriousness, I've found the pace of all this and the uncertainty, given the importance of what is at stake, really nerve-racking. I don't think this should have been rushed along the way it was.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Mar 24, 2017 11:50:05 GMT -5
I'm thinking he knows his bill won't pass, and the public actually wants to keep Obamacare. So he does this as a stunt - now he gets to keep Obamacare but still claim it's terrible and it's Congress's fault for not getting rid of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 14:55:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 24, 2017 15:20:55 GMT -5
Breaking news -- source says Obama has told Ryan to pull the health care bill. Typo, Freudian slip or brain fart? We report. You decide.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 15:30:29 GMT -5
Ha! That's me on phone-speak, doing quick updates. Sorry!
As I was typing the post, I was thinking that Obama must be popping champagne right about now. Seriously, he must be damn happy. Then, of course, we have the fact that I'm in deep denial about Trump being president...
|
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Mar 24, 2017 16:23:56 GMT -5
I'm sure they'll try again, but maybe they'll be a little more freaking realistic next time around. Something that doesn't have near-universal disapproval.
I know, I'm living in a fantasy world...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 17:40:49 GMT -5
Paul Ryan seems to be saying it's over and Obamacare stays. www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/politics/paul-ryan-health-care/index.html?sr=twCNN032417paul-ryan-health-care0933PMVODtopPhotoI have to say -- that was a pretty damn half-hearted effort, if they are really done. It took a lot of time and wrangling to get Obamacare -- didn't they think they'd have to put in more than a couple of weeks of spade-work if they wanted to replace it? I also have to wonder how this will go down with voters for whom repealing Obamacare was high on their list of reasons for voting Trump. The fact is, many of them likely would have suffered under the bill the Republicans were pushing, had it passed. But I wonder how many of them had thought that through ("say, I'M on Medicaid! What do you mean, not anymore?!" Wait, I'm 63 -- you mean I'm going to be paying triple premiums?!" "hey, what about my maternity care?!") |
|
|
|
Post by Don on Mar 24, 2017 18:31:14 GMT -5
I'd guess some republican, somewhere, got smart enough to recognize that neither ObamaCare nor TrumpCare as written are economically viable in the long run, and decided if the scheme to enrich insurance companies and other cronies at the expense of the american people and their healthcare system is going to collapse, it would probably be wise to leave a Democrat's name attached to it.
Actually, I didn't believe there was that much introspection left in the whole republican party. I wonder who squeaked this past all the hubris?
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Mar 24, 2017 18:41:40 GMT -5
I'd guess some republican, somewhere, got smart enough to recognize that neither ObamaCare nor TrumpCare as written are economically viable in the long run, and decided if the scheme to enrich insurance companies and other cronies at the expense of the american people and their healthcare system is going to collapse, it would probably be wise to leave a Democrat's name attached to it. Yep. I'm glad it didn't pass because I thought it was a really bad piece of legislation. But let's get real: the Affordable Care Act is hardly a good piece of legislation. Sure, people who benefit directly--or know someone who does--are okay with such benefits, but down the road the premiums are going to go through the roof. But hey, the insurance companies will be happy. And after all, they're the ones who matter the most in all of this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:58:02 GMT -5
I agree that Obamacare could use some fixing.
But this didn't, to me, feel like a good faith attempt to come up with a genuinely good plan. It felt like they twirled their mustaches and deliberately tried to come up with something dreadful that would never pass.
I mean, I know the Republican party in Congress is divided, but still -- they are have an extremely comfortable majority in the House, enough so they need not even make a nod to the Democrats. You'd think they'd be able to come up with something they'd agree on, if they genuinely wanted to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Mar 24, 2017 19:18:02 GMT -5
Well, there is a good chunk of them who want it repealed, period. That's what they ran on, that's what their constituents expect. They don't want to fix it, they want it gone.
Other Repubs--the career politicians--are more pragmatic. They're looking for solutions, they really are. Unfortunately, they don't see eye to eye with the Dems on the nature of these solutions. At all.
So I think there are really three groups here, none of which has a majority, none of which can actually find enough common ground with another group to do anything.
Frankly, I think the Affordable Care Act* is beyond fixing. Eventually, it will implode, do a shit ton of damage, and force a single-payer system through. Some think maybe that was the long term goal. Me, I don't understand why the Dems didn't take that route from the get-go. They had the votes, once upon a time. Now, they've screwed their own legacy, as well.
* I'm not going to call it Obamacare anymore because when it crashes the system, I don't think Obama should catch all of the blame.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Mar 24, 2017 20:12:43 GMT -5
ACA always seemed such a strange, weird system. If you're going to mix private care with a certain amount of socialised care, the best way - it would seem to me - was to aim for an economics of scale. And not create a lock-in that's akin to legislate for an unavoidable tax that benefit private companies, ie insurance companies.
The only think I can think about it is that Democrats invested so much into the idea that they don't want to give it up, because giving it up would lose face. But that's not rational economics. That's silly politics.
It also seems completely counter-intuitive that Americans have become so conditioned against taxes that they will chose to pay a much larger co-pay and deductible that accounts for up to a third of their annual pay, than pay a two or three per cent more tax.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 21:10:31 GMT -5
ACA always seemed such a strange, weird system. If you're going to mix private care with a certain amount of socialised care, the best way - it would seem to me - was to aim for an economics of scale. And not create a lock-in that's akin to legislate for an unavoidable tax that benefit private companies, ie insurance companies. The only think I can think about it is that Democrats invested so much into the idea that they don't want to give it up, because giving it up would lose face. But that's not rational economics. That's silly politics. It also seems completely counter-intuitive that Americans have become so conditioned against taxes that they will chose to pay a much larger co-pay and deductible that accounts for up to a third of their annual pay, than pay a two or three per cent more tax. Pfft, spoken like a European. Kidding aside, I agree with you. The Affordable Healthcare Act is a compromise, and an awkward one. I do think it's better than what we had -- something that might not be appreciated by those who have always had good healthcare from your jobs. In New York, at least, if you did not have healthcare from your job, the rates were freaking insane, and out of reach for a ton of people. They're not awesome now, but they're better than they were by a good margin, and then there are the subsidies for low income people. Not perfect, not even close to perfect, but it put some kind of healthcare within reach of a lot more people. And personally, I am of the view that a civilized society doesn't let any of its citizens lack basic healthcare. (And don't go telling me about the emergency room -- that ends up being way more expensive for all of us when poor people are forced to use the emergency room for every health care problem. But still, it didn't really help our spiraling costs (which, I understand, are disproportionately higher than they are elsewhere). Between that, and between all the chaos, yes, I'm very worried about the future. Of course, IMO the Republican plan was worse -- it didn't fix the real problems, and it would have left many more people uncovered. Had it passed, I think it would have been a disaster in all kinds of ways. (I gather it too was an awkward compromise.) We can do better, I'm sure. I just hope some day we do. Meanwhile, I'd rather not see poorer people left without coverage. One thing I've always thought lunatic about our system, by the way -- that health care is connected to employment. I'm pretty sure the U.S. is the only country in the world that does that, no? Anyway, I'd love to see that go away (fine if companies want to give a bonus to employees that might go toward healthcare -- but the healthcare itself shouldn't be connected with the employer). Why on earth should you have to leave your healthcare plan (and perhaps switch doctors) just because you leave your job? Before the ACA, in New York at least, you had the very bizarre situation where an unemployed or self-employed person had to pay much more for worse coverage than a person who had a plan through his job. And even if you just switched jobs, you had to fill out a bundle of new paperwork and switch plans. That never made any damn sense to me. Still doesn't. And it creates all kinds of absurd problems -- e.g., why the hell should it have anything to do with your employer whether you get birth control or an abortion covered by your health insurance? Seriously. The employer shouldn't have a damn thing to do with it. ETA: And with all the money we pay, who is profiting, other than the insurance companies? My doctor, and my sister-in-law and a friend who are doctors, still have student loans after a good many years practicing. They are not rolling in money. Something is wrong, here. |
|
