I do not understand the confusion. Every insurance product out there is not all inclusive. If you want additional insurance, you add riders. If you want the full tamale, you go with the expensive crappy Obamacare. If you are healthy and do not need pre-existing coverage, you either go w/out insurance or you you go with less expensive crappy Trumpcare. Im going to leave full judgement out until the official plan is released.
Were there bigger complaints the past 8 years other than - -The ballooning deficit -governing through executive order -unconstitutional executive behavior ???... Other than being a secret Muslim ISIS agent of course... It seems like the GOP of the past 7 years was critiquing the Trump administration. And Obama's unconstitutional behavior pails in comparison to Trump openly attacking basic rights like the 1st amendment. Most of Obama's critiques here were simply made up conspiracy.
Nobody knows with certainty that bare-bones insurance coverage is all that they're going to need, that's where your argument completely falls apart. Unlike every other product out there, health care is something that EVERY person is going to need at some point in time and they have no idea when they're going to need it. A system where coverage of these services is a requirement prevents people with a lack of coverage from showing up to a hospital and incurring thousands of dollars in hospital bills that get passed on to the taxpayers. Remind me again which party is the fiscally responsible one?
No one knows when they're going to need health insurance. Sure, you know that you're likely going to incur more healthcare expenses if you're older or live an unhealthy lifestyle, but no one knows for sure when they're going to need (or not going to need) better coverage. This argument is trash.
Obamacare's consumer protection requirements bothered me. I am all for protecting the consumer, and I think it is especially needed in something as complicated as health insurance. Without them, no doubt many people would be swindled and find themselves without adequate coverage at the worst possible moment. On the flip side though, the regulation defined what the product itself should look like. I think that's a terrible regulatory approach, trying to define the path instead of the outcome. Companies literally cannot innovate that way. If you have to define how it'll be done, you may as well go single-payer. I'm not sure how to pull it off, but the regulatory regime for a market should be measuring and rewarding outcomes, and perhaps banning specific abuses. It sounds like Trump's EO will loosen up a bit on the definitions of what plans have to look like, which is good, but I haven't seen anything to suggest it is compensating for that product freedom with more accountability on outcomes.
We've all lost already due to their existence in government and our collective IQ's have all dropped thanks to the Twit in Chief.
Can you explain what you mean by this? If you look at the text of ACA , it spells out the minimum requirements such as maternity care, coverage for pre-existing conditions, prescription drugs etc. Can an executive order remove some of the requirements listed in the ACA?
I remember my insurance pre-Obamacare. Letters of denial on things I was covered for all the time, usually for pre-existing condition, even though I never had a pre-existing condition. I really hated my insurance. I still don't like my insurance, but at least it works the way it says. I have a Trump supporting friend on Facebook that doesn't have health insurance. She got pregnant and then had complications and had the baby very premature. She now has hundreds of thousands of medical bills she can't afford.
In some cases those requirements apply, in other instances they don't. Trump is beefing up the options where they don't quite substantially, to put it mildly.
Show me an Executive Order by Obama that took away health care insurance from people who need it most while benefiting the wealthy and insurance industry? That's the gotcha...
Expect the unexpected. That's the reason for the 10 essential coverage benefits. Yes, it is more expensive than the bared bones insurance health policies in Trumpcare, but it will not bankrupt you should your 3-year old need emergent appendectomy for a ruptured appendicitits (true story). At my age, I have very little altruistic reasons other than looking out for #1 and my family. Where something my adversely affect us like Trumpcare or his proposed tax cuts, then we become engaged. Sorry if it sounds selfish, just being honest.
Bye bye Obamacare. It's now Trumpcare Trump to Scrap Critical Health Care Subsidies, Hitting Obamacare Again
Yep. Hence the name of the thread. The flip-side of that is that you can scratch Obamacare right off of Barack Obama's legacy list. Except for the purposes of recording what a spectacular failure it was.
The 1st probably wouldn't do it. This 2nd will. Only fools care about legacy. People life aren't worth any one legacy.
Except that it was a massive success, millions now have access to insurance they could not have before - and it is forcing the HEARTLESS Republicans to show that all the care about is the almighty dollar and not society as a whole. DD
We are about to find out how stupid Republican voters really are. This is malpractice and sabotaging people’s lives out of nothing but pure spite. How can Republican voters look at themselves in the mirror anymore or do they even care anymore? I understand not liking ACA and believing in free market insurance, but nobody in their right ethical mind should say “this is the way we do it”. Cowards.
