Trump Won, Vows Day 1 Full Repeal. Lets Discuss.

[VolAgent]

The solution I've seen floated is that Medicare is essentially turned off for everyone under a certain cutoff, argument's sake, 55. Everyone getting it or about to start getting it is unaffected. Since nothing changes for them, their vote doesn't change. Medicare dies a slow and natural death as the covered group reaches the end of their life.

Younger group gets enough time to make other arrangements. Might come out and vote, but as we know, the 55+ voter base is significant.

So then I no longer have to pay Medicare taxes then right?

 

[AgencyAdvantage]

So then I no longer have to pay Medicare taxes then right?

This ^^^^^^ And social security too. I've been debating dropping paying ss and buying a decent long term disability and contributing the difference into my fixed.

 

[RayNY]

So then I no longer have to pay Medicare taxes then right?

Nope.

Current proposal is that the Medicare system goes away for all those under an age cutoff, replaced with some sort of voucher or private insurance subsidy. No matter what, it will cost the gov't less, which means it will cover less, which means more of the cost is on the individual.

Keep in mind, pre-ACA, Medicare was scheduled to go insolvent around 2017/2018. The changes under ACA bought about 10 more years, and it was projected to run until 2028. At that point, it would operate without a reserve and only pay out what's collected, projected to be around 80% of what it covers now.

 

[LGilmore]

FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T HAD FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE....OBAMACARE is like a hospital gown, you only think you are covered…........until you bend over.

Actually I lost a foot last year, I know first hand how health insurance works thanks. I maxed out by Feb of this year. Three years in a row I have maxed my coverage obligation for my portion of costs. I VERY CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THE ACA AND HEALTH INSURANCE. THANKS. I think I've breached about a half million in claims on what started as getting blistered wearing flip flops 2 and a half summers ago. Didn't smoke, drink, eat or drug myself into my health condition. I just walked. **** happens.

The ACA is fine, people don't like the name on the product that's all. It's not going to be adjusted because of the name rather than the function of the product.

I've done this about 30 years now, so please point me out when that decade of no cost increases occurred during these past decades?

This is why I wanted the political crap reduced on this thread, cause it doesn't actually help anybody. The ACA was a plan change. Quit acting like it's the only god damned one that's ever happened.

Thanks.

 

[AboutThatLife]

I'm proud of Trump for toning down his rhetoric. It's much more Presidential of him to say they will keep parts of the law that serve the public the most, as well as to say first priority is the criminal illegal aliens, then working with the non-criminal illegals who have lived in our country for a long time, while securing the border, then considering a wall, and then trying to figure out how Mexico would pay for it. He actually lined up the priorities correctly.

I'm not saying I agree with his immigration stance, just saying that prioritizing isn't bad. Same thing for ACA. Just because he wants to keep Guarantee Issue and other major issues, doesn't mean he won't repeal and replace Obamacare. Obamacare didn't think up these issues, and doesn't "own" these issues. These issues were major issues long before the ACA was ever proposed. They will be issues in any replacement. Replacement doesn't mean 100% opposite of the last law. It means taking care of the issues in a better way.

RayNY, I agree with you. ACA is complicated. I sure hope that they separate the issues on this one too, prioritize, and get the IFP market stabilized first. I am afraid if they try to gut Medicare, the retiree crowd will make them pay heavily at the mid-terms. I know it's complicated, because of the interconnected issues, but I really hope they don't include "gut Medicare" in the same paragraph as "repair ACA damage".

Do you think that the ACA the way it is today is the what the President envisioned when he was championing it?

Do you think that it is possible that Republicans did not want the ACA so they made it dysfunctional, and Democrats let it go betting on Hillary in 2016 and figured a dysfunctional ACA would allow them to pass single payer?

Do you think that if Congress was doing something other than saying NO and offering no solutions for the past 8 years that the President would have reformed it himself?

Thank you for your opinions.

 

[bluemarlin08]

Either take care of the poor by subsidies and no pre ex, and stick the middle class. Or be "fair' and understand health insurance isn't a right.

 

[yorkriver1]

Either take care of the poor by subsidies and no pre ex, and stick the middle class. Or be "fair' and understand health insurance isn't a right.

To complete the sentence, "in the USA." I am not a fan of single payer, but it is remarkable that we are the only 1st world country that can't figure out a way to take care of everyone's health. Swimming in the water of the way it is, asking "what water, I don't see any water". I know all the arguments pro and con. I have wealthy and poor clients who need to exercise and eat right, to stop requiring health resources. We need to help folks live better, find ways to allocate resources to take care of those who are sick, and reward wellness instead of illness. A short list. We can't easily walk back our ideals of business vs public entities. What healthcare executive or highly paid surgeon would be willing to earn what those positions earn in other countries. I am not saying they should, just pointing out part of the issues. We run healthcare as a business, not a public good.

 

[junkman]

Either take care of the poor by subsidies and no pre ex, and stick the middle class. Or be "fair' and understand health insurance isn't a right.

And exactly where when defining "fair" do you think the line between having healthcare and not should be drawn?

My family of 3 ACA premium s upwards of $20,000 in 2017 for the least expensive HDHP available only if I write it from my cabin in another county. Compound that forward for 7 yrs when my youngest gets out of college and it pretty much prices those making upwards of $100,000 out of the market.

Much better uses of the money are: college, retirement, a new tractor, house payments, just about anything - especially since benefits ore sparse enough that the only claims will be incurred if one or more are in the hospital.

Are you writing a check for that premium or sucking off some other option? You remind me of a teacher I had in grade school. His favorite saying was "I have mine, you have yours to get". It doesn't matter. He's dead now.

----------

ACA came about because we had a problem. Individuals with any health condition ever couldn't buy coverage. Now we have a different problem. People wanted change ... and got it.

Carriers said that in order to remove underwriting and pre-ex, there would have to be participation requirements. People with employer coverage didn't want to give up that tax free form of compensation. Everyone had an objective in trying to push the law 1 way or the other and instead of working out something that would work grid locked and we have what could be forced through.

At the end of the day, I'll pick an option from those that are available for 2017 and revisit the year after and won't be significantly impacted.

I've always believed that "Trump is for Trump" said elsewhere that I think Trump will rape and pillage. His appointments and attempted appointments to date have been family, friends in the oil business and from Wall Street. I'm fine with business and have been self-employed for years. I'm not fine with rampant greedy unregulated self interest trampling on the masses.

**** Trump. He has little hands and it is obvious.

 

[HealthGuy]

Junkman why the hard on for Trump? Unbelievable. He doesn't need the job as President.

 

[Ann H]

Do you think that the ACA the way it is today is the what the President envisioned when he was championing it?

Do you think that it is possible that Republicans did not want the ACA so they made it dysfunctional, and Democrats let it go betting on Hillary in 2016 and figured a dysfunctional ACA would allow them to pass single payer?

Do you think that if Congress was doing something other than saying NO and offering no solutions for the past 8 years that the President would have reformed it himself?

Thank you for your opinions.

You made a good point. But there is a a bigger point. Partisan didn't start with the Republicans refusing to fix it. The ACA was birthed in 100% partisan (Democrat) politics, with 0% Republican support. That didn't end with the law's birth. President Obama blamed the Republicans for not "fixing" it, but the only fixes he would approve were Democratic in nature. He had 0% regard for the needs of the other half of the country.

Maybe that "bigger point" is what you meant in the first place. I don't know. But "out-of-balance" is one of the big problems.

When you reform health care (which is 1/3 of the US Economy), you must take into consideration the needs of ALL people, from the poor to the working class taxpayer, from the sick to the young and healthy, from the consumer to the provider, from the insurer to the business owner. Otherwise, it falls flat on its face. The Republicans control Congress & the White House now. If they do another "extremely out-of-balance" law, it will fail big time. If their idea of "fixes" are only things that make the law stronger in their favor, it will continue to fail until the other half of the country stands up, slaps them down, and runs them over. Isn't it time we stop blaming the other party and work together? Insurers cannot blame Providers. Providers cannot say, "It's that darn insurance company's fault". The poor cannot expect the working class to go poor to pay for the poor's free stuff. The working class and rich cannot ignore that the poor are sometimes in a box, and need help before they can get out. It's a BALANCE, and any far-extreme out-of-balance approach is destined for failure. Pointing fingers at the opposing party and saying, "You wouldn't vote for it our way, you wouldn't fix it our way," is not even close to being balanced.