DescentBB

So I’m reading that article and thinking…yea this guy has a point…but then as per usual I get to the fucked up part…

So now we have another racially divisive term “white socialism” which of course is based on a lie and a misconception, and the misconception could easily be considered a lie, but I’m being generous.

not really, what he describes is a very real phenomenon, that resulted in defacto benefits to a mainly white lower middle class to upper middle class group. You might not like the charged term, but it is a sort of publicly funded gift that has traditionally been handed to the white collar and unionized blue collar labor, plus government workers. Jobs that until the 80s almost exclusively went to white people in America. The article notes a nostalgia to go back to THAT reality by some, preventing them from embracing what would be best for all. As you note, the author has a point, there.

I could get behind this idea and it gets expensive insurance out of your regular doctor visits loop entirely. What does everyone think?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kind-doc ... 07240.html

Noooo, paying for health care without insurance…the single payer crowd will never approve.

Spidey wrote:Noooo, paying for health care without insurance…the single payer crowd will never approve.

Nah, we just don't like insurance for this sort of thing in the first place.

And just what the hell do you think single payer is?

It's the same thing you have, except it doesn't cost as much.

No one should need "insurance" for everyday doctor visits. Insurance should only be for catastrophic illnesses, you know, like house or car insurance is used for?

I noticed the stock market is tanking today. The excuse of the day is that the Trumpcare ain't going to pass Congress because the of Freedom Caucus and that they'll start blocking EVERYTHING Trump wants in the future.

don't know who's floating THAT excuse, but mainly the issue today is interest rates seem stuck at a spot where the financial institution profits are stagnated as well. Tech stocks were doing fine, even hit a record on the NASDAQ for a wee bit. Big loser on the Dow was Goldman Sachs.

They were still floating it today on CNBC. Thursday's vote will tell.

I personally hope the bill doesn't pass just to teach Ryan a lesson. They still have plenty of time before the 2018 season to get the dam thing right. Trump has to learn getting a bill passed just to prove a point will not sit well with the electorate. What ever happened to to the 2015 bill that had bipartisan support and got shot down by Obama?

So why didn't this particular bill get reintroduced as a replacement if it was so great and wonderful? Did Paul Ryan want his own bill put forth instead just like the egotistical brat he is? Frankly, I'm with you on this one woody. I hope this mess ends up being Ryan's Waterloo because in a just released interview, Trump is now blaming Ryan for the whole debacle in order to cover his presidential ass. I'm betting Trump would love to say: "You're fired!", but I guess ruining Ryan's political aspirations is the next best thing.

Meanwhile, Trump is busy reliving his childhood by playing truck driver while the health care for millions of Americans melts down. Honk, honk, varroooom, varroooom.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-tr ... .sep=table

and, given that Ryan was briefed by Nunes on that supposed 'information' that Nunes felt compelled to dash to the White House with, good riddance.

What a lot of people don't understand (myself included) is why they didn't reintroduce the replacement bill submitted back in 2015 (I think it was then). The bill had bi-partisan support yet Ryan sought to introduce a Obama lite version.

It could be that Paul Ryan has a giant ego, really wants to kill Medicare and his way is the most efficient. Originally, Obamacare pretty much gave a 12 year extension to the life of the Medicare trust fund by putting in reductions in waste, fraud and abuse, helping save money within the system.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnwasik/ ... 4ca2eb5e61

https://www.medicareresources.org/blog/ ... e-know-it/

The new Trump/Ryan plan instead erodes the trust current fund life by about 3 years, that is if no other drastic changes have been slipped in during all this deal making, accelerating it's future demise, or in Ryan's best wet dream, privatizing it. Ryan hates seniors and it's showing. I hope the spoiled prick dies old, sick and penniless.

The House killed their bill. Then the Ryan comes to the mike and has the gall to blame the Dems for HIS failure to get a consensus within his OWN damned party. Ryan's a damned effing SOB! He can't even take personal responsibility for his own failure. They're all evil greedy bastards with no integrity and no compassion. Now they're going to just sit back and let Obamacare melt down, because that's what they and Trump want now as some form of sick punishment and with some states with only one insurer in the marketplace this year, that's pretty much guaranteed. I'm already going to have to pay a huge penalty for not having insurance for this year and a lot of people in the individual market are in the same boat as I am. I say, eff the idiot Democrats and the self-serving Republicans for creating this nightmare of a situation.

tonight, Schumer(didn't think he was up to it, frankly) grabbed his fellow New Yorker firmly by the balls. He went on National TV at dinner time and said plainly: "remove the repeal part, and we'll GLADLY participate in discussions of how to make it BETTER." Clearly, that is what the public really wants(despite the fact that what they really need is Universal Health Coverage). That is essentially what Trump campaigned on doing. The GOP did Trump no favors, but he needs them for other stuff, and especially to try and blunt the impact of the Russian thing. Tough spot, Orange Guy.

woodchip wrote:What a lot of people don't understand (myself included) is why they didn't reintroduce the replacement bill submitted back in 2015 (I think it was then). The bill had bi-partisan support yet Ryan sought to introduce a Obama lite version.

I sort of remember that, but wasn't it a cycle earlier(like 2013). Lots of new Freedom Caucus types, and they wouldn't have supported that one, either, as it still retained a certain minimal requirement for coverage to maintain. Plus, as time goes by, and as I suggested here years ago, the ACA is going to prove a critical lifesaver for more people the longer it goes forward. I suggested in 2012 that they were going to have just that difficulty, and they did. The non-ideologue wing saw those angry town halls, were told of the district voter phone calls and letters and determined they weren't going to face that going to a re-election campaign next year. Also explains the non-vote decision. No one ends up on record. Everyone gets a year to spin their role in the failure to follow through on the 7 year promise.
Oh, and those same town halls and other efforts are now likely to be repeated on either the Tax proposals, which will doubtless be a boon to the wealthy, and the proposed budget, a bludgeon to the poor and gift to the most fraud ridden branch of the our government(the Pentagon).

I'd like to hear from any tea party member concerning their opinion on Trump's failure to repeal Obamacare. It WAS one of THEE main reasons most of them gave for voting in Trump and he failed miserably, all at the hands of his own party, specifically the Freedom Caucus, who wanted a total repeal. Why Trump insisted on repeal and replace, I'll never know. So much for the art of the deal. Epic fail. Are they mad, resigned or what? Woodchip?

Slick, what's going to happen to the ACA as more and more insurance companies leave the exchanges? In Oregon, our options are getting fewer and even more expensive. I hate to see what next year's going to bring for premium rates when they've already skyrocketed THIS year for non-working individuals over 60. This particular group is getting screwed the most and the Dems don't seem to care. I sure as hell know that the Republicans didn't give a rat's ass with the even higher premium rates for the over 60 set with their failed plan.

By the way, the Dems should stop with their gloating over Trump's failure because the increasing costs problem still hasn't been addressed and that will eventually come home to roost for everyone. It's the elephant in the room. Plus, a lot of people dropped their insurance this year because of the very high premiums and when tax time comes around in 2018, they will be pissed and ready for a change. With a solid GOP controlling the government, there sure isn't going to be any help from that camp in fixing what needs fixing with the ACA. The Dems have painted themselves into a corner with no exit.

https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/20 ... -what-now/

Saw a fantastic one-liner earlier: "Ironic that Trump and Ryan didn't have a Plan B."

That's the problem. They went with "Plan B" first, but their supporters thought that they were going with "Plan A", which was the straight across repeal.

well, repeal would be a disaster. This plan was a disaster, so to TC's question, how do you fix it? Easy. A public option, available in all 50 states.

You have a public option...it's called Medicaid.

Tunnelcat wrote:I could get behind this idea and it gets expensive insurance out of your regular doctor visits loop entirely. What does everyone think?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kind-doc ... 07240.html

that's fine for routine visits, and well care, but what happens when you need surgery, testing, diagnositic scanning, rehab care, both physical and other types, mental health care, etc. Costs would be STAGGERING under that model. Absolutely staggering, because every stage remains a profit center, and I literally see no restraint on pricing whatsoever.

callmeslick wrote:

Tunnelcat wrote:I could get behind this idea and it gets expensive insurance out of your regular doctor visits loop entirely. What does everyone think?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kind-doc ... 07240.html

that's fine for routine visits, and well care, but what happens when you need surgery, testing, diagnositic scanning, rehab care, both physical and other types, mental health care, etc. Costs would be STAGGERING under that model. Absolutely staggering, because every stage remains a profit center, and I literally see no restraint on pricing whatsoever.

That's my point. Since we Americans seem to cherish our capitalistic system, THAT'S what insurance should be used for. Catastrophic care. Just like owning a house, you don't buy insurance for regular maintenance and repairs. You buy insurance for catastrophes, like fires and floods and pay out of pocket for painting or plumbing repairs. Same with your own body. You pay out of pocket for routine yearly care and it doesn't break the bank. It's cheap and routine, making it something you'd willingly have done yearly to stay healthy because it's cost effective. NONE of that care should be paid for through insurance. Now if you want protection from serious illness or accidents, THEN you can optionally buy insurance. Currently, no surprise, it's called "catastrophic insurance coverage". Along with that, there should be insurance tiers based on cost as well. One tier for accidental unforeseen injuries and mild illnesses and one for more serious illnesses and especially end of life care. I can guarantee you most people in this country wouldn't be able to afford the latter type of insurance either.

Now, if people decide that they don't like that model and I'm guessing that only capitalists and conservatives would love it, then making health care a basic human right and offering government run and administrated single-payer is the only other way to go. If we all believe that ALL life is precious, we should ALL be willing to pay the price. Personally, I'm in that camp. The young have to fork over the cash to support their elders, because eventually they'll be elders and they'll eventually use it too. What goes around comes around. None of this half-assed system we currently have, with it's requirement to pay for expensive private insurance, currently called Obamacare. Everytime I see some insurance company's CEO pay, or the huge sucking infrastructure just to administer all that paperwork, I cringe and want to strangle someone. Also, requiring the purchase of insurance in any system without any form of rationing or cost controls creates a vulturous money pit of a system that's unsustainable. That would be especially true with single-payer as well. People will always take what they can take, money be damned because no one wants to get sick, or suffer, or die. Make no mistake, with Boomers reaching their 60's and 70's now, they're the ones who are currently breaking the system, because they're the ones who's bodies are old and failing and they're the ones who DO want expensive end of life care without any consequence or thought to costs. They're saying, "Heal me and find a way to pay for it or I die". Sounds just like a few of those people at those recent town halls, doesn't it?

Let me ask you this slick. How many people in this country can manage to save up at least a million dollars for retirement? How about another separate million for just for health care protection in their old age? I can tell you very damn few are that fortunate. Plus, how far into future before it's 2 million that's required? Or 3 or 4 million? If people can't even save that much for their senior years just to live on, how in the hell can people expect to pay for health care when they reach old age? They can't. It's not possible. Most people just don't get paid that much in their lifetimes. Either we support each other, or we don't. With our country's current phobia of anything even remotely smelling of socialism, we won't. However, if we've stomached Social Security for all these years, we should be able to stomach Medicare for all for God's sake.

woodchip wrote:You have a public option...it's called Medicaid.

no, I'm referring to a publicly funded insurance pool that the customers pays into. Not free insurance.

TC, you are preaching to the choir on Medicare for All, with me. As to the rosy scenarios, you all better choose REAL carefully where you try and retire on just a million in assets, if you actually plan on living long into retirement. That kind of money would give you a decent life in certain American-friendly(so far) places in Central America and some other more remote locales, but here? Anywhere near a major population center and a million bucks isn't going to take you too far with medical costs and elder care.

I was making an example because it's a large round figure. A million dollars sounds like a lot doesn't it? But in reality in today's dollars, it isn't. Most workers in this country don't see or make that kind of cash in their lifetimes, let alone save some of it for the future. Yet if people want to retire by 65, or later if Republicans have their way, they're constantly being told to save, save, save for retirement all through their lives, then put it into a volatile and unforgiving stock market. Well, that DOESN'T include the fact that the average worker doesn't make enough to even save that much in the first place, let alone save some extra for future health care. It's a huge added burden that's beyond most people's income. Why conservatives are against a single-payer government system is beyond me, since it's nearly impossible for most normal working people to save the kind of money we're talking about. A decent and caring society should make an effort to take care of those have worked hard and paid their dues to society all their lives and who are now old, infirm or disabled. We need a strong system that's properly administered, not for profit and weeds out any deadbeats and abusers. Talk to most conservatives and they would rather you work even when you're sick and disabled, or until you've dropped dead and replaced you with another warm body.

there is, in our current economy and society, a VERY unrealistic expectation by individuals around retirement. Not saying that to pick on anyone, but what folks are expecting is beyond me. I worked for 30 years at what I'd peg as average to above average wages. Were I to depend on social security, I can expect a whopping $1400-1680 per month depending on whether I start taking it at 62 or 65 years old. In their final 8 years, my parents were paying $5600 per MONTH in elder care at a very nice, but hardly uber-luxurious place of their choice. They were extraordinarily healthy, so didn't need that level of care until their mid-late eighties. Lots of folks are far less fortunate, and thus, far more expensive to maintain.
Why this disconnect with the stark reality? A lot of folks remember the world their folks lived in, with company pensions added to SS, low Medicare supplementals and lower costs on many key items. Now, most folks are hoping for a 401K, generally self-designed with no freaking clue about investing, a dangerous mix. We are fortunate to own our homes and vehicles outright, but how many would-be retirees from the next crops will be able to say that? Even then, you have the ongoing outlays for property, school taxes, upkeep, utilities, etc. I have friends who've retired luxuriously on the cheap to Mexico, Costa Rica(4), Phillipines, Thailand, but that is a bold move for most seniors.
Don't have anywhere near the answers that I have serious questions and doubts on a lot of this stuff. It's just that I see a near-entrenchment of a two tier system in which maybe 10%(tops) live comfortable lives, get well educated, well fed, well housed, and generally free of economic worry if they are well grounded in investments. The other 90% seem almost fated to a nasty series of setbacks, roadblocks, substandard conditions and outright poverty, which cannot help but produce a social powderkeg. I see no one willing or even with a decent plan to get to where we deal with making that process more equitable.......

Just heard on CNN today that Trump is still quietly working on health care reform. Can't find it online yet though. It appears that Obamacare is still going down, one way or another. He also hates to lose and besides, he needs the extra money that they were expecting to take from Obamacare in order to pay for his tax reforms. It looks like we'll get National Wealthcare no matter what.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/us/p ... aucus.html

WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders and the White House, under extreme pressure from conservative activists, have restarted negotiations on legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act, with House leaders declaring that Democrats were celebrating the law’s survival prematurely.

the bill had 17% public support, and the Freedom Caucus thought it was too generous. See how that flies at the town halls. If anything gets done on healthcare it would have to be with substantial Dem support. Trump knows that, I'll suspect, but is in a bind should he admit it. He's sort of beholden, so long as the stench keeps building from the Russian connection, to the GOP to try and cover his ass. Eventually, it will all fall to crap.

Not to repeal the ACA. And a leader of the Freedom Caucus told a reporter last weekend that if the bill had actually gone to a vote, about half of those who said they wouldn't vote for it during all that arm twisting said that they would've changed their minds and voted for it during the actual vote.

and, repeal dies in the Senate. At least without an improved replacement. More than the two needed GOP Senators have made that clear.

Death by attrition and uncertainty.

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/ ... e-20170406

callmeslick wrote:the bill had 17% public support, .

Tell slick, how much public support did the AHCA before it was voted on? Oh thats right, we need to have it voted on before we could read it. Classic Dem. maneuver

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:the bill had 17% public support, .

Tell slick, how much public support did the AHCA before it was voted on? Oh thats right, we need to have it voted on before we could read it. Classic Dem. maneuver

it was hovering around 35-40% in final form. Aboot 40% felt it was too invasive, but another 25% wanted nothing short of Universal Medicare. Classic Woody behavior, deflection and BS? That bill was every bit as available in final form at the last stab of the GOP POS.

Revisionist propaganda at its best.

woodchip wrote:Revisionist propaganda at its best.

ignorance at it's usual, with you.