T1B

Disclaimer:
The following post may be seen by some as critical of SCROTUS Donald Trump.
88, Rooster, Pikkkle and others known to read this forum may want to seek a safe space so they will not be exposed to such personally upsetting material.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donald Trump, on Monday, said:

Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/t ... ted-235436

Really? Nobody?
Trump claimed many times before the election that he had a beautiful wonderful plan to cover everybody better and more cheaply than the ACA, and that it could be implemented the day he took office.
But - as some of the more observant of us assumed - he had (and has) NOTHING.

Is there any remaining doubt that this man is an incredibly dishonest, irresponsible, stupid fucking con?

Or possibly that "Obamacare" is such a convoluted MESS especially because of the way it ties into the IRS tax code that it will be a chore to untangle. Of course that couldn't be possible.

Wolfman wrote:Or possibly that "Obamacare" is such a convoluted MESS especially because of the way it ties into the IRS tax code that it will be a chore to untangle. Of course that couldn't be possible.

So you knew...but Trump didn't.

Maybe you should be President.

88 wrote:

Mikey wrote:

Barack H. Obama and the Democratic Party that shoved the ACA prosthetic cock up America's ass wrote:Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated

You were saying?

That's a direct quote from Trump this morning.

You have a link to where Obama said the same thing?
Or to where he claimed to have a ready-made plan that's both beautiful and tremendous, besides cheap, and ready for immediate implementation?

I won't hold my breath.

Fake, all fake Mike...

Bucmonkey wrote:Fake, all fake Mike...

Of course....

Anything that casts Saint Donald in an unfavorable light must be fake.

That still pales compared to Pelosi's: "But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."

Well, in all fairness, healthcare actually used to be simple. You talked to an agent, they asked questions about your health history, sent someone to your house to draw blood, and soon you had a quote for a nice, low price. If you didn't have insurance, you went to the emergency room.

Then it all changed where insurance became coverage regardless of your health and those of us with good health paid for people who didn't want or qualify for insurance, had some horrible disease, or just liked the idea of government provided health coverage. My monthly premiums went from $275 a month and low co-pays for my wife and me to $975 for Obama-shit coverage.

All that bullshit about keeping your doctor and whatnot, only to hear Gruber tell us that it was all a purposeful scam to deceive the American people? Screw the Left and anything that Obama stood for. He could be for giving puppies to every child in the US and I'd be against it just on principle after Obamacare.

Learn to count to 14 you stupid fuck.

Left Seater wrote:That still pales compared to Pelosi's: "But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."

Yeah, old Nancy is pretty lame.

But then, she's not the President.

Mikey wrote:Disclaimer:
The following post may be seen by some as critical of SCROTUS Donald Trump.
88, Rooster, Pikkkle and others known to read this forum may want to seek a safe space so they will not be exposed to such personally upsetting material.

It's an Honor to be included in the same sentence as 88 and Rooster.

Thank you Mikey!

88 wrote:

Mikey wrote:That's a direct quote from Trump this morning.

You have a link to where Obama said the same thing?
Or to where he claimed to have a ready-made plan that's both beautiful and tremendous, besides cheap, and ready for immediate implementation?

I won't hold my breath.

Trump is trying to tell the truth to the American people.

It was exactly what your statement deserved.

I mean, you were kidding. Weren't you?

Or maybe you were saying that he's trying to tell the truth, but he just doesn't know how?
That still deserves the LOLs.

Take your false equivalency and shove it up your ass.

What I find puzzling is the lack of anger over Obamacare in the first place by the Left. If it is such a good thing then why was it necessary to deceive the public about its' costs and weaknesses? And if they discovered how difficult making healthcare work was only after they implemented it, why should we have any faith that government can do anything else properly? The website alone was easy and Obama and his bureaucrats couldn't get that right. Anybody remember the whopping 6 people they signed up on the first week or whatever it was? This is your government at work-- and the Left wants more as evidenced by the large crowds at Bernie Sanders rallies.

If Obamacare had run somewhat close to being effective and efficient maybe we could have a worthwhile discussion about government run programs. But this debacle gives empirical proof that government does nothing well but tax you and screw up.

That Trump and the Republicans have to unfuckulate what the Dems and the single provider enthusiasts have implemented and are having difficulty doing so should not come as a surprise. After all, Obama intentionally made it that way.

Rooster wrote:What I find puzzling is the lack of anger over Obamacare in the first place by the Left.

It helped our family avoid a gap in coverage between jobs.

88 wrote:I think it boils down to how you hear Trump.

You hear "Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated" and concluded, based on your preconceived opinions, that this is more evidence that Trump is stupid, shallow and unqualified.

I hear "Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated" as an admission to people who want him to fix things in DC that the health care system is way more fucked up than he and his people initially imagined, and that fixing the fuck ups from the prior administrations is going to take more time than originally contemplated.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. He probably is in over his head a bit at this stage of his presidency, just like all others before him. And he definitely campaigned as if he knew exactly what to do when in truth, he intended to simply wing it if and when he got there.

I'm no fan of Trump. I said it from day 1. I voted for him because he wasn't as demonstrably corrupt as the alternative, and because he said he was going to try to fix things in DC (which definitely need fixing). If he turns out to be a terrible president, he will leave the office at the end of his term and we'll get another douche to take over. That's how it works.

Even when tRump has been asked specific questions he's never been able to give answers that were anything more than platitudes. The most common comment about him during speeches is that he sounds like the kid called on to do a book report but hadn't read the book.

When he said he didn't know heathcare would be so complicated he meant that he's over his head intellectually.

Diego in Seattle wrote: When he said he didn't know heathcare would be so complicated he meant that he's over his head intellectually.

Fukkkk off and die!

BSmack wrote:

Rooster wrote:What I find puzzling is the lack of anger over Obamacare in the first place by the Left.

It helped our family avoid a gap in coverage between jobs.

So once you regained employment, did your premiums go down or did you remain on Obamacare?

FUCK OFF YOU STUPID TWAT

The difference between COBRA and what Obamacare was offering was like the difference between the cost of KC Scott's motorcycle and War Wagon's trailer. No comparison.

Went on COBRA once, about 25 years ago. They wanted something like $2400/month even back then to cover me, my wife and two young kids.

I tried the private insurance market and got turned down by all the providers I tried because of a pre-existing condition (high cholesterol that was pretty much under control). That basically precluded me from ever being self-employed (until ACA anyway).

88 wrote:

BSmack wrote:FUCK OFF YOU STUPID TWAT

The difference between COBRA and what Obamacare was offering was like the difference between the cost of KC Scott's motorcycle and War Wagon's trailer. No comparison.

Welfare is awesome to the recipient. Free money. Who wouldn't like it?

So you're in favor of a "strongest of the fittest" system?

88 wrote:

BSmack wrote:FUCK OFF YOU STUPID TWAT

The difference between COBRA and what Obamacare was offering was like the difference between the cost of KC Scott's motorcycle and War Wagon's trailer. No comparison.

Welfare is awesome to the recipient. Free money. Who wouldn't like it?

It just kept the price down to what I would have paid when I was working. Yea, I guess you would rather kick someone when they are down.

Diego in Seattle wrote: So you're in favor of a "strongest of the fittest" system?

Why should I have to pay more for someone else's choices? You want to smoke go ahead, do drugs, great, but I shouldn't have to pay more because you do.

The thing is, it didn't have to be this way. We could have changed the law to allow interstate health insurance. We could have allowed former employees to remain on their former employer's health plan while either having their present employers pay their portion of the premium or have the former employee pay both parts. We could have done any number of things to improve health care and the insurance coverage, but that wasn't the goal of the Obama administration. The whole point was to have the government (and the supposedly permanently ascendant Left) take control of a fifth of our economy.

Obamacare isn't here to cover the uninsured or people with pre-existing conditions. If it was, the Dem majority would have worked with the Republicans. It's' purpose was to wrest control from American citizens and place it in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. So said Jonathan Gruber, architect of the ACA.

Rooster wrote:
Obamacare isn't here to cover the uninsured or people with pre-existing conditions. If it was the Dem majority would have worked with the Republicans. It's' purpose was to wrest control from American citizens and place it in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. So said Jonathan Gruber, architect of the ACA.

Does your company compete on the open market, or are they recipients of no-bid contract largesse?

Open market. I have a health savings plan that remains mine until I either use its' entirety or I pass away and leave it to my heirs. I can put as much into it as I choose with a limited matching amount from the entity for whom I work.*


*edited for accuracy

BSmack wrote:...the difference between the cost of KC Scott's motorcycle and War Wagon's trailer. No comparison.

I've barely even read or posted here much lately, then I come across this gem.

Why must my humble, yet comfy abode of 30 years, be spoken of in comparison to a crotch rocket?

Never mind the cost or inherent value, my home isn't on wheels, is attached to an 8" thick solid concrete foundation and I own it. Never paid a dime of rent.

Neither have I ever been "between jobs", you worthless, food stamp begging, non-value added, fat fucking leech.

War Wagon wrote:

BSmack wrote:...the difference between the cost of KC Scott's motorcycle and War Wagon's trailer. No comparison.

I've barely even read or posted here much lately, then I come across this gem.

Why must my humble, yet comfy abode of 30 years, be spoken of in comparison to a crotch rocket?

Never mind the cost or inherent value, my home isn't on wheels, is attached to an 8" thick solid concrete foundation and I own it. Never paid a dime of rent.

Neither have I ever been "between jobs", you worthless, food stamp begging, non-value added, fat fucking leech.

You've stayed at the same job for a long long time. Thanks for the update on your abode.

So how do we fix the current problem of getting young healthy low risk people to buy insurance?

There are a few things we could do.

First off, let them pay a reasonable market rate. Not an artificially high one that subsidizes higher risk/poor fukks.

Next, make the consequences of going without insurance more serious. Today, an uninsured person gets fukked up, goes to the hospital and if he can't pay, the hospital writes it off. There are no lasting consequences. I would have the government pay these bills, then hound that fukker all the way to the grave for payment in full. Garnish the fukk out of his wages. Treat him the way the IRS treats deadbeats. No bankruptcy forgiveness of these bills. We should also give ERs the ability to slam the fukking door in the face of assholes that want to use the ER for routine medical care. I would support gov. funded walk in clinics, but they would be very bare bones and immune from malpractice.

There is one other thing that needs doing. Insurance company customer service is teh suck because it can be. most of us do not have the ability to fire our health insurance provider. We are stuck with them. If employers simply wrote their employees a check to be spent on the insurance of their choice, the insurance company might have a little more interest in making the customer happy.

smackaholic wrote:

Next, make the consequences of going without insurance more serious.

That's a good little socialist.

Today, an uninsured person gets fukked up, goes to the hospital and if he can't pay, the hospital writes it off. There are no lasting consequences.

In the Old Days (10+ years ago), I became very ill, and being self-employed, had no insurance (not "health care"... fucking "INSURANCE"). I went to an emergency clinic, where they charged me about 1/3rd the "going rate" (I think the exam was about $50, plus bloodwork and whatnot). I paid them cash-money. They even explained that not having to pay someone for the HOURS of paperwork involved made it... cheap.

And newsflash -- hospitals take freaking payments. Uninsured patients are cheap and profitable.

Get the fucking government out of our business. I'm all for a safety-net (because I'm fucking caring and shit), but government meddling (sup, Nixon) triples the cost of everything. It's sheer madness...

How much does a pack of birth-control pills cost, cash-money? $8? But get Big Government involved, and send it through the pencil-pusher at the pharmacy, then the insurance company, then Mr. Government... now it's $60. You think people should have cheap birth control? So do I... start a fucking charity and hand the shit out.


And so on, and so on.

Dinsdale wrote:

smackaholic wrote:

Next, make the consequences of going without insurance more serious.

That's a good little socialist.

Today, an uninsured person gets fukked up, goes to the hospital and if he can't pay, the hospital writes it off. There are no lasting consequences.

In the Old Days (10+ years ago), I became very ill, and being self-employed, had no insurance (not "health care"... fucking "INSURANCE"). I went to an emergency clinic, where they charged me about 1/3rd the "going rate" (I think the exam was about $50, plus bloodwork and whatnot). I paid them cash-money. They even explained that not having to pay someone for the HOURS of paperwork involved made it... cheap.

And newsflash -- hospitals take freaking payments. Uninsured patients are cheap and profitable.

Get the fucking government out of our business. I'm all for a safety-net (because I'm fucking caring and shit), but government meddling (sup, Nixon) triples the cost of everything. It's sheer madness...

How much does a pack of birth-control pills cost, cash-money? $8? But get Big Government involved, and send it through the pencil-pusher at the pharmacy, then the insurance company, then Mr. Government... now it's $60. You think people should have cheap birth control? So do I... start a fucking charity and hand the shit out.


And so on, and so on.

How is making people accountable for their bills socialist?

I agree with everything you said and you are correct that medical care done as a 2 party cash transaction is much cheaper than the insurance game where A provides a service to B and C pays for it. This creates all sorts of conflicts and makes the action of getting paid more expensive than the service itself.

My point was that in our current system, people know that no matter what happens to them, they'll get care and that if it is a huge bill, no worries, somebody else will eat the cost. If you let them know that incurring a large bill without the means to pay for it will result in them pretty much becoming indentured servants for a long time, some of them will insure themselves.

Yeah like how some people pay for police services they never use.

Learn to read.

The fact that you live in a more or less civilized society where strangers don't walk up to you and take your shit is how you "use police", you fukking idiot.

Ok then deflector, fire service. Is there anything you asshats do not want to privatize?

88 wrote:I voted for him because he wasn't as demonstrably corrupt as the alternative.

Comrade Sessions says what?

Moving Sale wrote:Ok then deflector, fire service. Is there anything you asshats do not want to privatize?

Though you won't admit to it, that was an admission of defeat.
RACK smackaholic and 88.

It's an admission that all they do is deflect. Learn to read. Oh and learn to count to 14.

88 wrote:

socal wrote:

88 wrote:I voted for him because he wasn't as demonstrably corrupt as the alternative.

Comrade Sessions says what?

There are a lot of comrades in the Senate, according to your definition:

You really are an idiot.