Putting aside the matter of an extension for the ACA tax credits, here's a question for trump devotees.
- Thread starter berg80
- Start date
Billiejeens
Diamond Member
- Jun 27, 2019
- 52,600
- 38,634
- 3,545
They stay uninformed
They only believe their Cult Media
But this is hard to believe even knowing that.
They chose those plans because they couldn’t afford ones with lower deductibles. As it was, I was paying around $800 a month for a bronze plan, and then I had to pay out of pocket for all my medical costs. And that was very typical.
So aftet Obamacare was forced down our throats, I was laying close to $10,000 a year in premiums, plus I paid close to $6,000 for PT I needed. That year, my medical costs were $16,000! And Obama called that “insured.”
But the worst was that I lost my specialist for a very critical condition. He wouldn’t accept Obamacare because he said the reimbursable was too low.
Obamacare hurt millions of people like me. And now we see what a complete disaster it is - such a failure that it has driven costs way up, while enriching insurance companies, and needs to be propped up with hundreds of billions of dollars to keep it from total collapse.
IKR? He acts like he’s never heard of $6,000 deductibles.
Are you really this dumb? The costs are low for SOME people because taxpayers are covering their premiums!
You’re exasperating.
Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
If obama had promised us controlled price increases in exchange for a more limited network of available doctors instead of promising us savings of twenty five hundred dollars and keeping your doctor, there might be less bad taste about the Unaffordable Care Act causing prices to skyrocket.
Not because we are dumb enough to be disappointed that a politician's promise never comes true, but that they think we are dumb enough to keep believing them after such a blatant lie. That's why the claim of "it would have gone up much higher without the Unaffordable Care Act" has no credibility whatsoever.
If those plans were so s*****, why did they have to be taken off the table? The free market would have caused them to wither away.
Unless you're going to fall back on the stupidity of the american voter for buying s***** plans?
Any plan that covers pre-existing conditions is going to be a horrible plan. Because the premiums would have to be so high for the insurance companies to take a risk like that.
Unless . . . of course, Obamacare tells the insurance companies to raise their prices as much as they like, and the government will subsidize the huge increases.
(U)ACA has been an incredible giveaway to Health insurance providers.
Last edited:
berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,804
- 27,531
- 2,820
- Thread starter
- #148
Any promise he made was vulnerable to not come to fruition due to constant GOP sabotage.
Six ways Trump has sabotaged the Affordable Care Act | Brookings
The Trump administration has vigorously sought to undo the Affordable Care Act through both administrative and judicial means.
www.brookings.edu
Donald Trump’s first term represents an extraordinary development in what political scientists have called the administrative or unilateral presidency: how presidents seek to transform domestic policy through executive initiatives without congressional approval. Aggressive, partisan, multifaceted administrative presidencies have been especially evident since Reagan with presidents of both parties participating. Trump has in multiple ways taken this trend to new levels as his efforts to sabotage the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or Obamacare) vividly illustrate.
For analytic purposes, the term “sabotage,” should not be used lightly. Presidents upon taking office typically have priorities that trigger executive actions strengthening some programs while weakening others. The losing programs often face resource reductions, pressure to deemphasize certain goals, directives to alter their administrative approaches, and other measures that can undermine their effectiveness. In doing so, a president often pays lip service to the program, claiming it has been “modernized” or otherwise improved. In contrast, Webster’s defines “sabotage” as efforts to foster “destruction and obstruction” and to “cause the failure of something.” In the context of the administrative presidency, it reflects a commitment to program emasculation and termination through executive action. As such, it sharply departs from the constitutional requirement that the president “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
The Trump administration’s efforts to sabotage the ACA and their consequences receive detailed attention in a recently released Brookings book, Trump, the Administrative Presidency, and Federalism. For present purposes, I highlight six major sabotage initiatives which emerged in the wake of congressional failure to repeal and replace the ACA.
Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
Trump retroactively sabotaged the ACA, causing premiums to skyrocket and people to lose their chiice of doctor the first year?Any promise he made was vulnerable to not come to fruition due to constant GOP sabotage.
Six ways Trump has sabotaged the Affordable Care Act | Brookings
The Trump administration has vigorously sought to undo the Affordable Care Act through both administrative and judicial means.
berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,804
- 27,531
- 2,820
- Thread starter
- #150
3. Construct off-ramps to cheaper, lower-quality insurance. The ACA had sought to bolster the quality of health insurance through such measures as requiring insurers in the individual and small-group markets to cover ten essential benefits, guaranteeing coverage of those with preexisting conditions at premium rates similar to heathier enrollees, and reducing risks of medical bankruptcy by prohibiting insurers from imposing certain spending caps on health care for an enrollee. By promulgating new federal rules related to short-term and also employer association health plans, the Trump administration strove to expand access to cheaper coverage that did not meet these quality standards and would siphon off healthier enrollees from the exchanges.Any promise he made was vulnerable to not come to fruition due to constant GOP sabotage.
Six ways Trump has sabotaged the Affordable Care Act | Brookings
The Trump administration has vigorously sought to undo the Affordable Care Act through both administrative and judicial means.
Donald Trump’s first term represents an extraordinary development in what political scientists have called the administrative or unilateral presidency: how presidents seek to transform domestic policy through executive initiatives without congressional approval. Aggressive, partisan, multifaceted administrative presidencies have been especially evident since Reagan with presidents of both parties participating. Trump has in multiple ways taken this trend to new levels as his efforts to sabotage the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or Obamacare) vividly illustrate.
For analytic purposes, the term “sabotage,” should not be used lightly. Presidents upon taking office typically have priorities that trigger executive actions strengthening some programs while weakening others. The losing programs often face resource reductions, pressure to deemphasize certain goals, directives to alter their administrative approaches, and other measures that can undermine their effectiveness. In doing so, a president often pays lip service to the program, claiming it has been “modernized” or otherwise improved. In contrast, Webster’s defines “sabotage” as efforts to foster “destruction and obstruction” and to “cause the failure of something.” In the context of the administrative presidency, it reflects a commitment to program emasculation and termination through executive action. As such, it sharply departs from the constitutional requirement that the president “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
The Trump administration’s efforts to sabotage the ACA and their consequences receive detailed attention in a recently released Brookings book, Trump, the Administrative Presidency, and Federalism. For present purposes, I highlight six major sabotage initiatives which emerged in the wake of congressional failure to repeal and replace the ACA.
OODA_Loop
Account Terminated
Not according to the former Attorney General
berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,804
- 27,531
- 2,820
- Thread starter
- #153
Your simplistic remark requires context.
AI Overview
Yes, former Attorney General Eric Holder provided extensive testimony and documents to Congress, primarily during investigations into the "Operation Fast and Furious" ATF gun-walking scandal and other matters.
What documents has Bondi turned over with respect to the Epstein files?
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department’s inspector general on Wednesday issued a scathing critique of federal officials for their handling of the botched gun-trafficking case known as Operation Fast and Furious, but essentially exonerated Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., whom many Republicans have blamed for the scandal.
In a long-awaited report, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, laid primary blame on what he portrayed as a dysfunctional and poorly supervised group of Arizona-based federal prosecutors and agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, describing them as “permeated” by “a series of misguided strategies, tactics, errors in judgment and management failures” that allowed a risky strategy to continue despite the danger to public safety.
The long-running controversy over Operation Fast and Furious, which ran from late 2009 to early 2011, stemmed from the fact that the A.T.F. officials directing it did not act swiftly to seize illegal weapons because they hoped to bring a bigger case against the organizers of a gun-smuggling network linked to a Mexican drug gang. The officials eventually lost track of hundreds of weapons, including two that were found near the site of where a Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, was killed in a shootout.
The 471-page report is likely to be the closest definitive accounting of the operation, which has been the source of continuing confrontation between Congressional Republicans and the Obama administration, including a House vote to cite Mr. Holder for contempt in June.
For more than a year, some Republicans and commentators on conservative news media outlets have floated theories that senior Obama officials must have approved the operation — deliberately fostering gun violence to provide a rationale for strengthening gun-control laws — and that they were engaged in a cover-up.
The inspector general’s investigation found no evidence to support those accusations.
Guns Inquiry Urges Action Against 14 in Justice Dept. (Published 2012)
The Justice Department’s inspector general faulted a group of federal prosecutors and drug agents in the botched gun-trafficking case called Operation Fast and Furious.
Do you think the House committee that subpoenaed the Epstein files abused their authority as the one lead by Darrell Issa did during the F&F hoax?
OODA_Loop
Account Terminated
Right with a simplistic AI overview?
berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,804
- 27,531
- 2,820
- Thread starter
- #155
Feel free to factually refute Holder did cooperate with the House investigation until its highly politicized nature became extreme.
What documents has Bondi turned over in response to the subpoena issued by a House committee controlled by R's?
berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,804
- 27,531
- 2,820
- Thread starter
- #156
Standard Medicare Part B monthly premium to jump 9.7% in 2026
The standard Medicare Part B premium will increase to $202.90 per month in 2026, up $17.90, or 9.7%, from $185 per month in 2025, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.The increase marks the second-highest Part B premium increase in dollars, according to Mary Johnson, an independent Social Security and Medicare analyst. The highest increase of $21.60 per month happened in 2022.
Retirees may see this as a “continuation in relentless cost increases,” Johnson said via email.
What has trump done to slow medical cost inflation?
OODA_Loop
Account Terminated
No need to the House voted to hold him in contempt for it. Both civilly and criminally in a 255–67 vote, with 17 Democrats voting for the measure, 2 Republicans voting against the measure.
Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
Off-ramps to cheaper insurance?
That's exactly what many people need. People don't realize how much they need a cheaper policy, because the taxpayer is soaked for their expensive one-size-fits-none coverage that the Unaffordable Care Act requires us to buy. The fact that you, Berg, do not pay the premiums does not mean that they are "cheap" under Obamacare.
Basically, I pay much more than I did before the Obama-era for health insurance that covers me if I suddenly decide I'm a woman trapped in a man's body, or if my wife gets pregnant again, even though we both got "fixed" after our fifth one. I also have to pay for mental health and substance abuse treatments when I have never needed and will never need such services.
Eliminating those coverages might make the policy seem low-quality to Berg, but they would be fine for me. As usual, socialism is so good it has to be mandatory.
Because I don't just pay for my own absurdly unneeded mandated coverages and my wife's. No, I have to pay for Berg80's so he can "work" as a paid DNC shill on the internet, or a video game beta tester, or a "fact-checker," or part-time Doordash driver, and have his insurance subsidized by my work as a teacher, television engineer, UPS'er, and soldier, all jobs I have had that provided employer offered health insurance. I got my first job at 15, and started paying taxes. I got my first job that offered health coverage at nineteen, and I've been earning my coverage ever since.
I work for my healthcare and for Berg's, while Berg contributes nothing and probably gets the "earned income tax credit" at the end of the year. So I can see why Berg would think that is a wonderful idea.
ACA exchange premiums are not cheaper. The are so expensive that they are paid for by two parties: The policy holder and the taxpayer.
Last edited:
What he ^^^ said!!!!!
Nostra
Diamond Member
- Oct 7, 2019
- 90,737
- 82,483
- 3,615
Yeah, right. Do I need to explain what a "subsidy" for insurance is? Do you know who pays that 'subsidy'?
Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for federal health coverage or access to the Federal Health Insurance Marketplace under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). However, they can purchase private health care plans and receive subsidies to help with monthly premiums and other costs.
Undocumented immigrants are generally eligible for the Marketplaces and subsidies, with some exceptions
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
Tucker Carlson Smacks Down Interviewer on Israel's "Right to Exist": Does Lebanon? Does Gaza?- Started by munkle
- Replies: 1
-
-
Hakeem Jefferies "Donald Trump should keep his reckless mouth shut"- Started by TroglocratsRdumb
- Replies: 4
