/---- So when will you Libtards stop your belly aching?
Kellyanne admits it - they aren't really going to repeal Obamacare.
- Thread starter NYcarbineer
- Start date
AntonToo
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2016
- 38,855
- 12,155
- 1,560
******Yawwwwwwwn ******They've been saying repeal or replace for a long time.Republicans have been at this REPEAL shtick for 7 years and something like 50 repeal votes by now. 7 Years they had to come up with something else, for 7 years they couldn't and to this day they have no credible alternative.
Why? Because it took them 30 ******* years to even come up with Obamacare itself as a market based alternative to single payer liberals usually pushed.
And gullible rightwingers now think that they'll be able to figure this out at a drop of a hat
Anyone that has been around healthcare debate long enough knows that improving on Obamacare from ground up is right near impossible task. The better option was ALWAYS to gradually refine and add to the framework instead of blowing the whole thing up and throwing out all real progress made.
Unfortunately going with a better option has been difficult because we have a reactionary, dead-end movement that has been cultivated by blowhard rightwing pundits that is more interested in opposing anything Obama signed than they are in making well informed and thought out decisions on what is good for America.
Didn't you get the memo?
...are you aware of the difference between "saying" and real solutions?
They have been saying it because rightwingers EXPECTED them to say nothing less, be it realistic or not. They first and foremost had to promise it, but never had anything resembling a real plan on how to actually do it.
When Obama was running against Hillary he was saying he opposes mandate, but when the rubber met the road he had to let that position go - it ACTUALLY just didn't work.
Stay tuned then, dipshit.
Ok ignoramus, you watch
It's gonna be fun..******Yawwwwwwwn ******They've been saying repeal or replace for a long time.Republicans have been at this REPEAL shtick for 7 years and something like 50 repeal votes by now. 7 Years they had to come up with something else, for 7 years they couldn't and to this day they have no credible alternative.
Why? Because it took them 30 ******* years to even come up with Obamacare itself as a market based alternative to single payer liberals usually pushed.
And gullible rightwingers now think that they'll be able to figure this out at a drop of a hat
Anyone that has been around healthcare debate long enough knows that improving on Obamacare from ground up is right near impossible task. The better option was ALWAYS to gradually refine and add to the framework instead of blowing the whole thing up and throwing out all real progress made.
Unfortunately going with a better option has been difficult because we have a reactionary, dead-end movement that has been cultivated by blowhard rightwing pundits that is more interested in opposing anything Obama signed than they are in making well informed and thought out decisions on what is good for America.
Didn't you get the memo?
...are you aware of the difference between "saying" and real solutions?
They have been saying it because rightwingers EXPECTED them to say nothing less, be it realistic or not. They first and foremost had to promise it, but never had anything resembling a real plan on how to actually do it.
When Obama was running against Hillary he was saying he opposes mandate, but when the rubber met the road he had to let that position go - it ACTUALLY just didn't work.
Stay tuned then, dipshit.
Ok ignoramus, you watch
AntonToo
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2016
- 38,855
- 12,155
- 1,560
Speculative. Fact remains that IRS can still withhold a tax for not having insurance.
If everything is left as is and there is no penalty people will simply not get instance until they need it, making providing insurance a losing proposition and unraveling whole individual market and crashing our healthcare system.
Irrelevant. What the IRS can do and what they will be allowed to do are two different things. LOL
AntonToo
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2016
- 38,855
- 12,155
- 1,560
Irrelevant. What the IRS can do and what they will be allowed to do are two different things. LOL
Again:
If everything is left as is and there is no penalty people will simply not get instance until they need it, making providing insurance a losing proposition and unraveling whole individual market and crashing our healthcare system.
Now in your ignorance you may assume that this is an outcome acceptable for IRS and a President concerned with things like elections and historic legacy, but it is just not so.
I don't think you understand....or maybe you do.
The ACA requires that people buy insurance coverage they don't want or they don't need. It also requires employers to pay for it. Many employers would rather pay a fine than pay for insurance for their employees. Millions will lose their current coverage and have to join an exchange and sign up for insurance that is too expensive and has higher than normal deductibles, rendering their coverage useless. Some companies, just to avoid paying a penalty (tax), will reduce their employees' hours to get below the minimum required to qualify for mandates reducing their incomes. Good luck taking that to court too.
Yep. And I'm sure destroying our health care system will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.Irrelevant. What the IRS can do and what they will be allowed to do are two different things. LOL
Again:
If everything is left as is and there is no penalty people will simply not get instance until they need it, making providing insurance a losing proposition and unraveling whole individual market and crashing our healthcare system.
Now in your ignorance you may assume that this is an outcome acceptable for IRS and a President concerned with things like elections and historic legacy, but it is just not so.
AntonToo
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2016
- 38,855
- 12,155
- 1,560
I don't think you understand, mandate is in the law because a system that provides access to healthcare to all Americans (Republicans and Trump are still promising to remain) DOESN'T WORK WITHOUT IT.
Obama didn't like the idea of mandate, but he had to accept it because the alternative of insurance-only-when-you-want-it cannot work.
No person in this world is without risk of serious injury or expensive illness. Correspondingly, no person in this world should be without insurance. Republicans used to call insurance mandate a matter of taking responsibility for the financial risk your body poses to society...times have changed.
Last edited:
AntonToo
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2016
- 38,855
- 12,155
- 1,560
Yep. And I'm sure destroying our health care system will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.Irrelevant. What the IRS can do and what they will be allowed to do are two different things. LOL
Again:
If everything is left as is and there is no penalty people will simply not get instance until they need it, making providing insurance a losing proposition and unraveling whole individual market and crashing our healthcare system.
Now in your ignorance you may assume that this is an outcome acceptable for IRS and a President concerned with things like elections and historic legacy, but it is just not so.
??? Incoherent nonsense.
I just explained how what you are proposing will destroy healthcare market...and your response is to say that I'm the one that wants to destroy it. Wtf?
Penelope
Diamond Member
- Jul 15, 2014
- 60,265
- 15,810
- 2,210
Did your DR. retire? Did your plan change? Move to new job your plan will change, wait long enough your Dr will die or move.
How did you get screwed?
Lewdog
Gold Member
I just gave my opinion. It's not really fair to say anything, because as of so far Trump and his staff have proven only one thing, they will lie... even when it can easily be proven to be a lie.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #53
The Republicans are going to include their own form of a mandate. They're going to give people a big tax credit if they buy insurance,
but if you don't buy insurance, you won't get the credit, therefore you'll be paying that tax, aka penalty.
Which is how it works now.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #54
And the expanded Medicaid?
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #55
The GOP is in a tight spot because support for REPEAL is now down to under 20%.
usmbguest5318
Gold Member
Though I suspect you're correct about the general nature of what will transpire regarding health insurance -- even though Ryan has barred the CBO from releasing their 2017 analysis of the cost to repeal O-care, there is no way it's gone down from what it was in their last report that in its "best case" scenario put the sum at over $320B -- I have to say your thread title is inflammatory and not representative -- literally or contextually -- of what Conway actually said. Indeed, it's so much of a material misrepresentation that it puts words in her mouth.
I don't like saying that because I truly cannot on any level stand that woman -- not her morals/ethics, not her contrived approach to political and policy discourse, not how she apparently has no principles that I can respect or that she won't forsake, not even her looks. The only nice thing I have to say about her is that she's smart; however, given how she uses her smarts, that quality is insufficient for she is scarier than is Trump for I think her far smarter than he. That parlous paramour to perfidious political posturing risen from Cocytus' Judeccan center has no rightful place in any administration.
FWIW, one cannot very well rail against the sort of deceitfulness and dullards' rhetoric issuing from Trump and his cronies and then use the same sensationally reprobate tactics. At the very least, one must be thematically accurate, thematically representationally faithful in one's presentation of a "headline." Information disclosure and substantive political debate should not be sensational; it must be coldly accurate.
One thing that should concern the people who rely on the ACA for their health insurance is the temporal qualifier in Conway's statement -- "during his transition time" -- which in a blatantly pregnant way leaves unanswered what those people should expect after the transition time. People who have any degree of compassion for those individuals, or who may reasonably foresee needing to avail themselves of ACA-offered health insurance, also should be concerned.
think they'll tweak it a bit and call it trump care
saveliberty
Diamond Member
- Oct 12, 2009
- 58,878
- 11,043
- 2,030
You're already signed up, no worries. You can keep your handouts.
Frankeneinstein
Gold Member
Don't disagree, but who from this past election could we have elected that that is not true of?
pwjohn
Gold Member
They've already done that by eliminating all fines and penalties for not signing up.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
DEFUND THE SUPREME COURT WE CAN LIVE BETTER WITHOUT IT
- Started by merrill
- Replies: 2
-
-
Epstein files - way, way too many coincidences for this not to be anything but bad -Dusti Rhea Duke- Started by frigidweirdo
- Replies: 2
-
-
