What "better system" has been proposed? Keep in mind millions of people now have health insurance via ACA, especially people with pre-existing conditions, so these "better systems" need to offer replacement of coverage for these millions of people. Otherwise, "getting rid" of ACA isn't a fix.
You've gotta pass it to see what the plan is. In all seriousness though, having a mandate that people have insurance whether or not they can afford it gives lots of people insurance on paper, but doesn't mean they can afford to use it. From a practical standpoint, it doesn't make their life any better. It's an accounting improvement much like how if you make enough people not count towards an unemployment number, you can make that number look really good without actually improving anything. With costs continuing to outpace inflation and more and more insurance companies dropping out of the market entirely, how are people in a better situation realistically?
Since I immediately benefited from ACA by being able to place my daughter under my policy (and avoid the $500/month Texas High Risk Pool policy) I can assure you it was a not a "paper benefit"and it may her and our live's much better. And I am among many millions who had pre-existing conditions whose lives became much better. So rather than talking in abstracts, what better system has been proposed? A "blank paper" is not a better system.
So you personally benefited while countless others either didn't benefit or were harmed, yet that makes it a success to you. I guess that's how politics works.
You are the one that made a blanket statement about the practicality of the ACA. The fact that so many people actually did use it that it overshot all use projections would say the opposite of your fact is true. You adamantly present the facts you imagine are right.
I am an example of someone directly benefiting from ACA... yes, that is the way government should work. And since there are millions (estimates range from 50 million to 50 million) of Americans with pre-existing conditions, I am certain I am not the only one benefiting from ACA. When you also consider the many millions of Americans added health coverage under ACA... well, you can see your attempt to make this "personal" or somehow a selfish benefit is silly. btw, when challenged I suggested workable improvements to ACA that should address the "countless others that didn't benefit or were harmed. But perhaps you somehow missed the original question... what are the "better systems" that have been proposed? Please highlight how they address pre-existing conditions.
The statement I made is that it is failing, which it is, and that when you mandate something that people must purchase regardless if they can afford it or afford to use it.....then use the numbers of people who got it as a measure of success....well that's not exactly accurate. People had the option of getting insurance they couldn't afford to use or pay a fine, is it shocking that people got the insurance they couldn't afford to use? No. Does that mean their life is easier now that they have one more added expense and no more access to healthcare due to not being able to afford to use the insurance? Of course not. The whole thing was short sighted and costs are still greatly outpacing inflation meaning that even though it wasn't actually affordable to begin with, it's getting less and less affordable day by day. Of course, we want to pretend that Obama did something good, so let's pretend this failure was actually a success. That's how politics work I guess.
You just sourced 3 articles that said the same thing. Did we just finish talking about plagiarism? Anyhow, none of those will even begin to fix Obamacare. Its pre-existing conditions killing the insurance companies, not 'glitches' and lack of more subsidies. Its great the pre-existing condition clause is working for you. However it is not working for the healthy or the insurance companies.
Somehow I might be be inclined to give a bit more credence to someone at the Brookings Institute and professors at Harvard and University of Chicago... but perhaps I am being unfair to your credentials and expertise in healthcare insurance and government policy (if so, my apologies). Please explain why this won't improve ACA. What? Seriously? Is this the stated opinion of the republican party, or just your own expert opinion? Because I sure haven't heard one republican blame pre-existing conditions. In fact, in the closest thing to a replacement plan (ok, a replacement framework, since they don't have a plan or program yet), here's what they say about pre-existing conditions: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/22/embargoed_dont_pub_til_wed_am_-_house_republicans_unveil_obamacare_replacement.html So if you don't like ACA covering pre-existing conditions, I guess you won't like the republican "plan" much better. But I am looking forward to you and others campaigning and blaming pre-existing conditions... I am sure it will win converts to the new GOP. Please accept my (and my daughter's) apologies for her pre-existing condition for ruining the health care and insurance system. I know, I am selfish for wanting secure and affordable health care for my daughter. In fact, I will also apologize for the millions of other people with pre-existing conditions. We didn't realize our selfishness would create such problems, especially since ACA didn't start covering us until 2010, and for some reason we thought the health care and insurance problem existing for years before 2010. I also offer my apologies to the insurance companies. I am sorry you as an industry only made net profits of only $448 billion dollars last year. I am sure your profit sharing checks took a big hit. While I am apologizing... sorry Aetna. I know net profit growth of 19% must have hurt.
The Titanic didnt need bigger buckets to help bail out the water in the gaping hole in the ship. It needed more life boats. The ACA is a sinking ship. Pre-existing conditions is the hole. If you can't fix the hole, you better hope for a lifeboat. Its not looking so promising right now. Fixing "glitches" and offering more subsidies is not going to do anything for Obamacare to ensure its longevity beyond this decade. And you can stop being an ass. I have not remotely suggested I wish the likes of your family to wander off in the field and die because you have pre-existing conditions. You're the one clinging onto this sinking ship, busy blaming everyone else for the faults of your party. This isn't about me. This isn't about you. This is about Democrats tethering Obamacare to insurance companies who's only concern is about the bottom dollar. If you can't see the basic fatal flaw to this logic and why Obamacare was destined to fail before the last pen stroke was signed, then you probably shouldn't be in this conversation. You're own party f- you. I would be pissed if I was you.
That's just the standard fear mongering tactics of Democrats when anyone goes against something they are supporting. Remember when they were saying that we'd have dead people in the streets if the Republicans got their way and cut spending in order to get the annual deficit back under 1 trillion dollars? You just have to ignore that kind of ridiculous nonsense.
Pot meet kettle. Remember how the Republicans screamed about Death Panels? You remember the Conservative darling Sarah Palin? Christ.... Your party has some stupid spokespeople....
Wow... the anger. You'd think I would be the one upset, as the person who was somehow taking advantage of the pre-existing "clause". You asked for fixes... I presented a list. You said they wouldn't work, I asked for some analysis or evidence supporting your belief. You claim insurance companies are going bankrupt due to ACA, and I presented industry-wide and specific company (Aetna) financials showing large net profits and profit growth. And asked you to provide evidence that insurance companies were going bankrupt. You claimed pre-existing condition coverage was "bankrupting" companies, and again, I asked for proof... and challenged you to consider that claim, as even the latest republican plan/framework/mumbo jumbo included pre-existing conditions. Each time I asked for any supporting evidence for your claims, you ducked the challenge, you take personal shots, and yet you call me an ass? But nevertheless, it seems clear you have nothing to bring to the discussion. Do you work for an insurance company by any chance? If so, I guess I understand how your bias has caused you to burst a gasket.
"Fear mongering"? Does the phrase "death panels" ring any bells? But still interested in the "better systems" you think should replace ACA?
What party are you suggesting is my party? You're gonna have to stop that binary thinking, just because I call out Democrats for their stupid ways doesn't mean I'm a Republican, or that I agree with the stupid things Republicans do or say. I'm as critical of Republican stupidity as I am of Democrat stupidity. Anyway it's hilarious that you are still trying to defend a program that is nearing complete collapse in just 6 years. Truly well thought out legislation.
Oh, you mean like the dumbass conservatives saying that Obama was going to take all their guns??? Yeah, the fear-mongering happens on both sides, you tool.
Obviously the Republicans because you just made some stupid comment about fear mongering (that's been THE Republican mantra for 8 years) and you've been supporting their stupid position of incompetence and inaction. You've been thoroughly debunked and have run at of excuses as to why conservatives have been utterly incompetent. It is hilarious how you are too ignorant to see the forest through the trees. It's more thought at than what preceded which you are stupid enough (I assume) to want to go back to it I assume.
That's not fear mongering, that's the goal of MANY on the left. If they could get away with it, they'd do it in a heartbeat. Sorry kiddo, I'm not a Republican, but I do see how you might think so given that to you anyone who isn't a Democrat is a Republican. LOL, by whom and when? Are we talking about how a few people outright lied about the president trying to get legitimate input by Republicans when it comes to the ACA? Lying isn't debunking people.
Nah son. You just seem to agree with the current Republican group and don't seem to offer anything so it's a pretty accurate assumption.... Obviously me, since I even gave you a chance to show how the Republicans weren't incompetent and you utterly failed. However, pick any of the number posters who ripped apart your weak sauce.
Except, Obama has never said he will take away guns. As recently as this past June in a PBS interview: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/obama-to-gun-owners-im-not-looking-to-disarm-you/ Nor do most Democrats, who like many people, want stronger background checks, waiting periods, and closing the internet loophole. So the "taking guns away" is simply a scare tactic, funded by the NRA, and parroted by people like you. And because you have admitted that you only vote for republicans.
