Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 4:52:54 GMT
For a rich person's tax cut. Yup. This country has reached a new low. The question now is how low are trump & company going to drag us.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 4:56:01 GMT
New tax break for Insurance Co Executive pay >$500,000. Way to go, AHCA!! www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-obamacare-ceos-20170307-story.html"Concealed within the 123 pages of legislative verbiage and dense boilerplate of the House Republican bill repealing the Affordable Care Act are not a few hard-to-find nuggets. Here’s one crying out for exposure: The bill encourages health insurance companies to pay their top executives more.... It does so by removing the ACA’s (i.e., Obamacare!) limit on corporate tax deductions for executive pay. "
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Jun 23, 2017 6:20:22 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care.
|
|
|
Post by missfrenchjessica on Jun 23, 2017 11:31:02 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care. I can't either (full disclosure: I'm a legal 'resident alien' from Canada who lives in the US), but according to my husband's cousin: "You can have whatever you want, just don't expect ME TO PAY FOR IT!" That's a verbatim quote when we stumbled upon the newest iterations of the health care bills and potential changes in education (again, full disclosure--I'm a teacher who is very against what Betsy DeVos wants to do). I seriously don't understand his pov...and he doesn't understand mine. For me, there are certain things that every citizen on the planet should have: health care and education are just two.
|
|
|
Post by heather on Jun 23, 2017 12:13:43 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care. Because the poor aren't people in this country. Corporations are people, the poor aren't. Couple that with a pregnancy less than 3 months old is more important than children that are already born, and you get the perfect storm for this shit to happen.
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Jun 23, 2017 12:53:55 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care. There is a broad and unapologetic condemnation of the poor in our country. If the poor want health care, they will find a way to get it; otherwise, they deserve what they (don't) get.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Jun 23, 2017 12:58:05 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care. There is a broad and unapologetic condemnation of the poor in our country. If the poor want health care, they will find a way to get it; otherwise, they deserve what they (don't) get. Yup, that does often seem to be the thought process ..."Well get a job! And make sure it's a decent one!" As life is just that simple for everyone.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 13:10:35 GMT
And the GOP is "pro-life" (bs!) until that life needs expensive medical care. Care for the fetus, not the child. Have a premie? Medical bankruptcy for you!!! www.marieclaire.com/politics/news/a27858/senate-republicans-insurance-bill-harms-children/"In September 2010, a new provision of the Affordable Care Act banned health insurance plans from applying lifetime limits on essential care. Layla was born in August. And so it was just sheer luck that our health insurance at the time did not have a lifetime cap. If it had, Layla would have blown through that ceiling in the first weeks of her life—we would have gone bankrupt trying to save her. Care for a premature baby can cost literally millions of dollars, and before the ACA, it wasn't uncommon for families with preemies to end up financially devastated. In the new bill, the text of which was just released today, that lifetime cap comes back. I've always wondered how it is that Republicans who call themselves pro-life could support financial ruin for parents who simply want to keep their babies alive."
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Jun 23, 2017 13:11:56 GMT
There is a broad and unapologetic condemnation of the poor in our country. If the poor want health care, they will find a way to get it; otherwise, they deserve what they (don't) get. Yup, that does often seem to be the thought process ..."Well get a job! And make sure it's a decent one!" As life is just that simple for everyone. What gets me is that I was active in politics as a teen in the 80s, and I remember that the debate then was more, "everyone who works should be able to have basics, but if you don't work, you can suffer" v. "We should make sure everyone has basics." Now, even people with jobs are castigated -- as the minimum wage has stagnated, as housing, health care, and education costs have spiked relative to inflation, and as people who work have greater income instability, the goalposts have shifted -- as you suggest, the debate is no longer working v not working as who deserves to have a place to live, healthcare, and food, but, rather, if your job doesn't permit you to afford those things, whether or not it's your fault for not having a "better" job.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 23, 2017 13:19:59 GMT
What most of us non-Americans can't wrap our heads around, is the fact that so many Americans are okay with poor people dying from lack of health care. There is a broad and unapologetic condemnation of the poor in our country. If the poor want health care, they will find a way to get it; otherwise, they deserve what they (don't) get. And let's not overlook the fact that the poor are overwhelmingly likely to be brown or black in our country. There's a bit of racism mixed up in there, too.
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Jun 23, 2017 16:18:26 GMT
There is a broad and unapologetic condemnation of the poor in our country. If the poor want health care, they will find a way to get it; otherwise, they deserve what they (don't) get. And let's not overlook the fact that the poor are overwhelmingly likely to be brown or black in our country. There's a bit of racism mixed up in there, too. There definitely is, and minorities are more likely to experience poverty, but the majority of poor people have still been white. I think part of the bash-the-poor is the "hey white poor people, you are poor because brown people have both taken your jobs and sponged off the state."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 16:27:21 GMT
Pete Souza, President Obama's White House Photographer, has been sort of stalking trump on Instragram by posting pictures of President Obama in the same situation as a trump photo op. Of course trump comes out looking like petty little man that he is.
Today's picture is of President Obama standing in front of a joint session of Congress to lay out his arguement for the ACA.
Here is Pete Souza's comment under the photo...
"Sept 2009: Not to belabor the point but six months prior to the final vote on the ACA President Obama spoke to a joint session of Congress which was televised live on the 3 networks and most cable news channels ( not sure about one of them). He laid out his argument for health care bill in his speech. And later participated in an all-day health care summit with bi-partisan Congressional leaders that CSpan broadcast in its entirety. And he also spoke at the GOP Caucus retreat and answered every question;this was also broadcast on cable TV. Okay, sorry, I guess I did belabor the point."
Ok I want to know where is this from trump? Where is something like this from the Republicans in Congress?
What Pete Souza did today and that disgraceful handling of disabled people at McConnell's office yesterday has done is show what disgraceful human beings trump and the Republicans in Congress are.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 17:20:52 GMT
Has anyone read/heard the more detailed plans? I keep hearing reducing Medicaid funding, but is that meant as an across the board reduction for everybody, or is it more in line with his thinking of getting people off of Medicaid so limiting it, and then reducing it?
There are different groups of people that are on Medicaid.
There are those that are physically/mentally incapable of working and will need it forever.
There are those that find themselves out of work, and need the help temporarily until they find employment again.
There are people that work and don't make enough money to cover premiums and OOP expenses.
There are those that might stay on it because they can, and don't want to work.
I just haven't heard any details.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 17:22:29 GMT
Two things that did stand out to me was the plan allows kids to stay on their parents' plans until 26--a good thing.
BUT, I also heard it would increase the amount seniors need to pay in? WTF. (Maybe that was for Medicare, and I misspoke).
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Jun 23, 2017 18:15:40 GMT
And the GOP is "pro-life" (bs!) until that life needs expensive medical care. Care for the fetus, not the child. Have a premie? Medical bankruptcy for you!!! www.marieclaire.com/politics/news/a27858/senate-republicans-insurance-bill-harms-children/"In September 2010, a new provision of the Affordable Care Act banned health insurance plans from applying lifetime limits on essential care. Layla was born in August. And so it was just sheer luck that our health insurance at the time did not have a lifetime cap. If it had, Layla would have blown through that ceiling in the first weeks of her life—we would have gone bankrupt trying to save her. Care for a premature baby can cost literally millions of dollars, and before the ACA, it wasn't uncommon for families with preemies to end up financially devastated. In the new bill, the text of which was just released today, that lifetime cap comes back. I've always wondered how it is that Republicans who call themselves pro-life could support financial ruin for parents who simply want to keep their babies alive." I doubt pro-lifers even care about the fetus. Do you actually think they would support the healthcare to provide said fetus with proper pre-natal care? Or food stamps for the pregnant woman to get adequate nutrition? Intervention from Social Services if she's in an unsafe situation and can't get herself out? What about addiction that harms fetal development? No, treatment costs money. Let's spend it on abstinence education instead.
|
|
|
Post by mrssmith on Jun 23, 2017 18:25:09 GMT
For a rich person's tax cut. I clicked on p 2, saw this image, and immediately started crying. I would love to punch McConnell in the face. I work in a children's hospital and hear stories all the time of kids w/ complex medical conditions who are getting care due to Medicaid (which doesn't cover everything either). I sat in a meeting with all the division heads of the hospital. NO ONE THINKS THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. Kids will suffer. They don't care. Please call your senators, even in blue states. If you're in IL, call Gov. Rauner and ask him to speak out publicly about Medicaid cuts. IL is circling the drain and won't be able to cover the costs. They need to hear our voices. If you're phone phobic, it takes just 15 seconds. Or tweet & send emails. They need to hear the opposition.Save
|
|
|
Post by mrssmith on Jun 23, 2017 18:26:42 GMT
Two things that did stand out to me was the plan allows kids to stay on their parents' plans until 26--a good thing. BUT, I also heard it would increase the amount seniors need to pay in? WTF. (Maybe that was for Medicare, and I misspoke). AARP's statement: SaveSave
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 18:30:01 GMT
This one little blurb from Paul Sargent's column in the Washington Post, is IMO, one of the most important things people need to beware of...
"The Senate bill front-loads the sweet stuff and delays all the painful stuff. The tax cuts kick in immediately; so too does relief from the individual mandate. But the bill holds off on slashing Obamacare subsidies until 2020, well after the next round of congressional elections. And it delays the Medicaid cuts until 2021, right after the next presidential election. So, by design, the law aims to allow Republicans to duck political accountability for taking insurance away from people."
Little cowards.
I suspect the Republicans will find away to pass their bill. And if they do, since more people than should are oblivious to things unless it impacts them directly at that time, it will be up to the Democrats to pound home what will happen before the 2018 midterms. If they can't find away to deliver this message by then, then we really and truly are screwed.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 19:21:34 GMT
For a rich person's tax cut. I clicked on p 2, saw this image, and immediately started crying. I would love to punch McConnell in the face. I work in a children's hospital and hear stories all the time of kids w/ complex medical conditions who are getting care due to Medicaid (which doesn't cover everything either). I sat in a meeting with all the division heads of the hospital. NO ONE THINKS THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. Kids will suffer. They don't care. Please call your senators, even in blue states. If you're in IL, call Gov. Rauner and ask him to speak out publicly about Medicaid cuts. IL is circling the drain and won't be able to cover the costs. They need to hear our voices. If you're phone phobic, it takes just 15 seconds. Or tweet & send emails. They need to hear the opposition.SaveI'm in Illinois, and I'll call Rauner, but I wouldn't count on him for sh!t. Just heard on the news a 5th GOP says no now.
|
|
|
Post by mrssmith on Jun 23, 2017 21:29:57 GMT
I know Rauner probably won't act, but we have to make our voices heard. I just called again. Encourage your friends in other key states to call their Senators. Heller in NV was key. Keep pressure on the others.
Here are some others:
- The following Senators are wavering and need to be flooded with contacts:
1. Heller is the most important (Nevada) - check! 2. Collins (Maine) 3. Murkowski (Alaska) 4. Capito (West Virginia) 5. Cassidy (Louisiana) 6. Flake (Arizona) 7. Gardner (Colorado) 8. Portman (Ohio) 9. Cruz (Texas) (yes, that Cruz - he's facing a tough reelection battle) - check! 10. Paul (Kentucky) - check! 11. Lee (Utah) - check! 12. Sasse (Nebraska)
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Jun 23, 2017 23:00:26 GMT
I know Rauner probably won't act, but we have to make our voices heard. I just called again. Encourage your friends in other key states to call their Senators. Heller in NV was key. Keep pressure on the others. Here are some others: - The following Senators are wavering and need to be flooded with contacts: 1. Heller is the most important (Nevada) - check! 2. Collins (Maine) 3. Murkowski (Alaska) 4. Capito (West Virginia) 5. Cassidy (Louisiana) 6. Flake (Arizona) 7. Gardner (Colorado) 8. Portman (Ohio) 9. Cruz (Texas) (yes, that Cruz - he's facing a tough reelection battle) - check! 10. Paul (Kentucky) - check! 11. Lee (Utah) - check! 12. Sasse (Nebraska) Heller has come out against the bill!
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Jun 23, 2017 23:28:10 GMT
We should not need to be negotiating this, fighting it, etc. Why are we the only developed nation who does not have a single payer system. Same benefits for everyone regardless of income, preexisting conditions, gender, etc. That's not true - most developed nations have universal care - but most do NOT have a single payer system. German's the one of the top of my head, but there many other countries that use private insurers and are not single payer. Germany's health insurance is private but non-profit and it's mandatory to have health insurance. Plus your employer is required to a percentage of the premium.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 1:17:13 GMT
That's not true - most developed nations have universal care - but most do NOT have a single payer system. German's the one of the top of my head, but there many other countries that use private insurers and are not single payer. Germany's health insurance is private but non-profit and it's mandatory to have health insurance. Plus your employer is required to a percentage of the premium. Not profiting off of misery. What a concept!!
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Jun 24, 2017 1:23:12 GMT
Has anyone read/heard the more detailed plans? I keep hearing reducing Medicaid funding, but is that meant as an across the board reduction for everybody, or is it more in line with his thinking of getting people off of Medicaid so limiting it, and then reducing it? There are different groups of people that are on Medicaid. There are those that are physically/mentally incapable of working and will need it forever. There are those that find themselves out of work, and need the help temporarily until they find employment again. There are people that work and don't make enough money to cover premiums and OOP expenses. There are those that might stay on it because they can, and don't want to work. I just haven't heard any details. The Medicaid cuts are both a roll back of the expansion and a straight cut of funding to Medicaid of billions. Currently Medicaid is funded by a combination of federal and state monies by percentages e.g. The state is responsible for x% of Medicaid spending and the federal government funds y% of Medicaid spending. The current senate bill would give states a finite chunk of block funding and when that money is gone it's gone regardless of the actual medical expenses that need paid. If your interested in some more nuanced discussion NPR has had aome good programming. These monies are going to tax breaks to medical device manufacturers and insurance ceos among others. The GOP is also planning on using these "savings" to finance their tax cuts for their trickle down economics.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 12:46:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Jun 24, 2017 13:16:25 GMT
It is ironic that it took Republicans and Trump to actually make the ACA popular. I hope this AHCA will be the Republicans Waterloo. They have done LITERALLY everything they accused the Democrats of doing when the ACA was passed: bill written in secrecy, check; no public hearings, check; etc. McConnell is the biggest fucking hypocrite and may honestly be more responsible for tearing apart this country and our government than Trump. He is the epitome of "Party over Country" and I find that personally disgusting.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 13:17:29 GMT
GOP seems to be much more concerned about Wealthcare vs. Healthcare.
Perhaps Trump was misquoted. Maybe he said:
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Ave & sign away the health care coverage of 23 million people, support lifetime and annual maximums and sky-high premiums for pre-existings & my supporters would trip all over themselves to justify how great that is!"
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 24, 2017 13:20:15 GMT
That's not true - most developed nations have universal care - but most do NOT have a single payer system. German's the one of the top of my head, but there many other countries that use private insurers and are not single payer. Germany's health insurance is private but non-profit and it's mandatory to have health insurance. Plus your employer is required to a percentage of the premium. How do they handle the unemployed and those who can't afford health insurance? Is there more than one private/non-profit insurance company?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:55:04 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 13:29:03 GMT
GOP Senators don't like being accused of "murder" because they support the GOP Wealthcare bill. Karma.
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Jun 24, 2017 13:39:11 GMT
Germany's health insurance is private but non-profit and it's mandatory to have health insurance. Plus your employer is required to a percentage of the premium. How do they handle the unemployed and those who can't afford health insurance? Is there more than one private/non-profit insurance company? I think I was incorrect in stating that they are private non profit. It's basically the public option (government run health insurance) and they have private insurance options if you qualify. If you're unemployed, the government pays your premium. Premiums are a percentage of your salary (around 15%). I'm not sure how many insurance companies they have but it is more than two. I think the ACA was attempting to use Germany's system as a model. This link has some more info and I plan on grilling my German visitor when she arrives this week. www.justlanded.com/english/Germany/Germany-Guide/Health/Health-insuranceThis is where I got my original information: www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/360133/
|
|