What Trump promises will be kept.....and soon forgotten?

[martybegan]

Bullshit. If you are going to rework a sizable part of the US economy you should know what you are placing into action.

You mean like "Repeal and Replace"?

We still have no idea of what replace means

Well they had no idea what would happen when they passed it, so your request for certainty is of course hackish and comical,

What they did know...

It covered pre-existing conditions
It removed lifetime caps
Covered children up to 26
Provided coverage for 30 million additional people

Where does "Replace" accomplish that?

Where did the original think it was going to get its funding from?

Typical progressive idiocy, promising things they have no idea how to pay for.

Well....ball is now in the Republicans court

How do they accomplish all that at a lower cost?

I will be just as eager to see a plan as you will be.

 

[Auld Phart]

Tell ya what...

make up a list of his promises, and in 4, or 8, years, count up the ones he didn't keep.

and, while you have nothing else to do during those 4-8 years, Make up a list of the promises Obama didn't keep, then one of the promises Bush didn't keep.

Hell, why you're at it, check Clintons promises.

then take a nice long look at them..

and wonder why you bothered with your OP

LOL you better sit down, your mind is about to explode:

Tracking politicians' promises | PolitiFact

2 problems.

1. Politifact

2. it only covers Obama.

 

[AntonToo]

Tell ya what...

make up a list of his promises, and in 4, or 8, years, count up the ones he didn't keep.

and, while you have nothing else to do during those 4-8 years, Make up a list of the promises Obama didn't keep, then one of the promises Bush didn't keep.

Hell, why you're at it, check Clintons promises.

then take a nice long look at them..

and wonder why you bothered with your OP

LOL you better sit down, your mind is about to explode:

Tracking politicians' promises | PolitiFact

2 problems.

1. Politifact

2. it only covers Obama.

There will be Trump edition as well.

Not going to be pretty, the man has a bullshit factory attached to his face.

 

[martybegan]

His only other option was to kill the law entirely, and unfortunately he lacked the moral stomach to do so.

I dunno. I don't know his basis for concluding the fed govt cannot choose to change a funding program that states may or may not opt into. The feds were essentially blackmailing states. But Congress's power to tax is literally unlimited by the Const.

But, I thought Obamacare was flawed. Still, the pols knew they were voting for what would have been universal care .... until Roberts changed it.

The Feds like to blackmail States, it doesn't make it right. The use of Highway funds to force a 21 year old drinking age is blatantly unconstitutional, but is allowed. Trump may use funding to bully Sanctuary Cities, which ironically is probably constitutional, as immigration is a federal issue, whereas alcohol laws are explicitly left to the States.

Well, I'm not going to argue. Roberts threw in a monkeywrench to make Obamacare unworkable. Imo it was going to be that anyway. But the question is whether Roberts torpedoed the law wittingly or unwittingly. (-:

I think he did it "wuss-ingly", as he wanted to torpedo it but didn't have the balls to do it.

Well yeah. But yeah, but if it's a tax, it's constitutional. End of discussion. But sure, he wanted it not there.

But, more importantly, Ryan is essentially right in that there has to be some incentive in ALL healthcare to not consume every little morsel you can swallow. If this abysmal election accomplishes that, while still covering everyone, and somehow allows seniors who haven't had to go nursing home on the public dole to die of their final illness without simply bankrupting their estates, I think it will be worthwhile.

One term. That's all. After the Gore debacle, I think we need compromise and putting Bork and Garland behind us. And if we elect someone like Pence who thinks you can pray away gay, I give up. LOL

There are arguments about all taxes being constitutional, even with the income tax amendment, there are always questions of apportionment between the States.

I would rather have Pence then someone like Clinton. With Pence the only way his ideas become law is if a sizable supermajority of people agree with him. progressive ideals can be forced on us with far fewer people backing them, via aggressive court actions, see Roe and Obergfell.

 

[Penelope]

Bullshit. If you are going to rework a sizable part of the US economy you should know what you are placing into action.

You mean like "Repeal and Replace"?

We still have no idea of what replace means

Well they had no idea what would happen when they passed it, so your request for certainty is of course hackish and comical,

What they did know...

It covered pre-existing conditions
It removed lifetime caps
Covered children up to 26
Provided coverage for 30 million additional people

Where does "Replace" accomplish that?

Where did the original think it was going to get its funding from?

Typical progressive idiocy, promising things they have no idea how to pay for.

Well....ball is now in the Republicans court

How do they accomplish all that at a lower cost?

His only other option was to kill the law entirely, and unfortunately he lacked the moral stomach to do so.

I dunno. I don't know his basis for concluding the fed govt cannot choose to change a funding program that states may or may not opt into. The feds were essentially blackmailing states. But Congress's power to tax is literally unlimited by the Const.

But, I thought Obamacare was flawed. Still, the pols knew they were voting for what would have been universal care .... until Roberts changed it.

The Feds like to blackmail States, it doesn't make it right. The use of Highway funds to force a 21 year old drinking age is blatantly unconstitutional, but is allowed. Trump may use funding to bully Sanctuary Cities, which ironically is probably constitutional, as immigration is a federal issue, whereas alcohol laws are explicitly left to the States.

Well, I'm not going to argue. Roberts threw in a monkeywrench to make Obamacare unworkable. Imo it was going to be that anyway. But the question is whether Roberts torpedoed the law wittingly or unwittingly. (-:

Kushner's brother said the main problem with the ACA is it didn't enforce the mandate enough. He borrowed lots of money to start a healthcare company from one of Trumps main supporters, and due to Trump he has lost lots of money. Oscar Insurance. The rich only care about themselves and the Pubs only care about their pocketbooks.

The beauty of the ACA is everyone paid, and if they didn't make enough or have enough, they went on Medicaid.

The ACA is essentially paid for with a tax on healthy middle class workers and healthcare providers. And say hello to President Trump.

No , the subsidizes are and the people on the ACA work and pay taxes. See the beauty of it. Those who are low income , are on Medicaid, not the ACA. Its not a free ride.

I bet you would rather pay for an uninsured 30 year old who didn't have insurance and has cancer, that is what costs tax dollars to be eaten up. Everyone gets care, insured or not. Some just get it when they have Stage 3 or 4 cancer instead of Stage 1.

 

[Faun]

What Trump promises will be kept.....and soon forgotten?

CHUCK TODD: You know, just about, well, about 15, 20 minutes ago, Mitt Romney put out a tweet saying, "Four years ago today, he put out his tax returns," and he believes that every 2016 candidate should release their returns before the first contest. Just so you know, every nominee, Mr. Trump, has released their tax returns going back to 1980. The Clintons, by the way, Hillary Clinton, we have every tax return that her name's been on since 1977 in the public domain. Will you release any of your tax returns for the public to scrutinize?

DONALD TRUMP: Well, we're working on that now. I have very big returns, as you know, and I have everything all approved and very beautiful and we'll be working that over in the next period of time, Chuck. Absolutely.​

 

[bendog]

You mean like "Repeal and Replace"?

We still have no idea of what replace means

Well they had no idea what would happen when they passed it, so your request for certainty is of course hackish and comical,

What they did know...

It covered pre-existing conditions
It removed lifetime caps
Covered children up to 26
Provided coverage for 30 million additional people

Where does "Replace" accomplish that?

Where did the original think it was going to get its funding from?

Typical progressive idiocy, promising things they have no idea how to pay for.

Well....ball is now in the Republicans court

How do they accomplish all that at a lower cost?

I dunno. I don't know his basis for concluding the fed govt cannot choose to change a funding program that states may or may not opt into. The feds were essentially blackmailing states. But Congress's power to tax is literally unlimited by the Const.

But, I thought Obamacare was flawed. Still, the pols knew they were voting for what would have been universal care .... until Roberts changed it.

The Feds like to blackmail States, it doesn't make it right. The use of Highway funds to force a 21 year old drinking age is blatantly unconstitutional, but is allowed. Trump may use funding to bully Sanctuary Cities, which ironically is probably constitutional, as immigration is a federal issue, whereas alcohol laws are explicitly left to the States.

Well, I'm not going to argue. Roberts threw in a monkeywrench to make Obamacare unworkable. Imo it was going to be that anyway. But the question is whether Roberts torpedoed the law wittingly or unwittingly. (-:

Kushner's brother said the main problem with the ACA is it didn't enforce the mandate enough. He borrowed lots of money to start a healthcare company from one of Trumps main supporters, and due to Trump he has lost lots of money. Oscar Insurance. The rich only care about themselves and the Pubs only care about their pocketbooks.

The beauty of the ACA is everyone paid, and if they didn't make enough or have enough, they went on Medicaid.

The ACA is essentially paid for with a tax on healthy middle class workers and healthcare providers. And say hello to President Trump.

No , the subsidizes are and the people on the ACA work and pay taxes. See the beauty of it. Those who are low income , are on Medicaid, not the ACA. Its not a free ride.

I bet you would rather pay for an uninsured 30 year old who didn't have insurance and has cancer, that is what costs tax dollars to be eaten up. Everyone gets care, insured or not. Some just get it when they have Stage 3 or 4 cancer instead of Stage 1.

the ACA is/was premised upon forcing healthy younger workers buying insurance so insurance would be affordable for sicker older people