OK I am usually just a "silent observer" of American politics, but can somebody explain to a European guy why is Obamacare bad?
I am serious, from what I know about it (just from reading online, I have never experienced it "in real life"), it sounds pretty similar to the system we have here for decades. I'd really like to know why is it so bad, what are its problems. I guess it IS bad when the next president wants to destroy it ASAP.
And no, I don't care who is the next PUSA, but I guess he must have some proper "points" when he wants to destroy a system which as I wrote sounds pretty similar to our system.
The Real Wizard · Member since
Because most Republicans equate any government intervention in anything with "socialism", which is a bad word, even though most of them don't know what it means.
There is a small percentage of the middle class who believe they are paying more money now for less health care, but the reality is - their old insurance company probably would've screwed them with "pre-existing conditions" (that they could literally make up) so that they wouldn't have to pay out when the client needed it most. Obamacare eliminated the insurances companies' ability to do this.
The only major political issue with it is that it's unconstitutional to force people to pay for something unless it's called a tax. The supreme court ended up agreeing that it's a tax, but they still sold it to the public otherwise. But it was literally the only way Obama could make any headway.
It's ultimately not much different from the Canadian and European systems - people are forced to pay it (which most Republicans also hate), just like they're forced to pay taxes, and the money is put into the same pot. And as a result, people don't have to worry about what will happen when they get sick - like every other civilized country.
As soon as Trump repeals it (purely to appease the insurance companies), people are literally going to die. Diabetics, for example, cannot afford the hospital visits that can amount to $5,000 per month. Before Obamacare, countless people died because they couldn't afford health care, and it was normal for people with cancer to work until a week before their death, otherwise they wouldn't get their medication, since their health care plan was through work.
But most Republicans literally don't care. Republicans basically exist to hate everything Democrats believe in, no matter how much it will help someone else. It's every man for himself. The American dream is for YOU to make it, and screw everyone else.
"The American dream - you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
Like Bob said, it's purely ideological - if the government does it, it's bad. It wasn't always like that - small government didn't become a Republican ideological cornerstone until some time during the Nixon administration. Democrats have similar preconceived notions, like public education always being preferable to private schools (I think they're usually right, but there are exceptions. Few Democrats would agree with that reservation), but they aren't quite as rabid about it as Republicans.
The GOP has a huge identity-crisis - Bush Jr ruined the reputation of the Reaganite neo-cons, and they haven't got a solid ideological foundation to replace it with, which is why Trump, who appeals to the baser instincts of many social conservatives (Tea Party) while not fitting the Republican mold at all, managed to take over the party. He couldn't have done that in the '90s. So, since Bush left, they've been thriving on opposing and denouncing everything the Democrats do. The logical result is what we have now: they want to repeal Obamacare as fast as they can, but they haven't got an inkling what to replace it with, and are terrified that Trump, who doesn't care about established Republican doctrine, might try to push a kind government-funded healthcare through - which would be far more 'socialist' than anything Obama did, but, as Bob said, the word 'socialism' doesn't have any real objective meaning in the US, just like the word 'fascist' didn't in the Soviet Union.
Funny aside: the ORIGINAL Republican Party under Lincoln was warmly endorsed by one European foreign correspondent who defended it to extreme lengths: Karl Marx.
BETA215 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[...] Before Obamacare, countless people died because they couldn't afford health care, and it was normal for people with cancer to work until a week before their death, otherwise they wouldn't get their medication, since their health care plan was through work. [...]
[/QUOTE]
And that's why I love living in Argentina. Do you have health problems? Well, you can take those medicines you need for less than it actually costs, and if you have to stop working for a while (depending on the employer, of course), most of the times you get days, weeks or months for recovering.
Ok, you don't have the monetary capacity you have in more developed countries, but the most important thing in your life, health, it's well taken care of.
I always thought that the American dream was commercial bullshit for monetary purposes. And yeah, reading this replies I got to the conclusion that I wasn't so wrong as some people said.
Thanks Wiz.
Costa86 · Member since
And you have hot latinas in Argentina.
Oscar J · Member since
I think us Swedes might rival Argentina both in terms of health care, and girls.
Saint Jiub · Member since
Obamacare is great for those who receive government subsidies ... A family of four making up to $92,200 a year qualifies for a subsidy, and the subsidies are proportionally larger for those with lower incomes.
... However ...
[b][i]*** Reasons Why "ObamaCare Is Bad": [/i][/b]
[b]Obama Lie of the Year: 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep it' ...[/b]
[url=http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-the-new-obamacare-taxes-2012-7]http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-the-new-obamacare-taxes-2012-7[/url] [b] Cutting hours for part time workers to avoid insurance mandate ... [/b]
[url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2015/01/13/obamacares-impact-companies-cut-hours-for-part-time-workers/#55c08f914ab6]http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2015/01/13/obamacares-impact-companies-cut-hours-for-part-time-workers/#55c08f914ab6[/url] [b] Healthy people pay penalty rather than enroll in Obamacare ... [/b]
Let us not forget - the Affordable Care Act was entirely based on the Republican alternative to Bill Clinton's universal health care plan, which would have had the US catch up to the rest of the civilized world, with only the insurance companies taking a small pay cut. But the Republicans being on said insurance companies' payroll made this impossible, so they came up with an alternative (which ultimately failed to pass on the federal level).
This plan ended up being the blueprint for Romneycare in Massachusets, so Obama thought - let's use this for the ACA, because the Republicans would vote for it now like they did in 1993, right?
Well, no. Something changed. Maybe the president wasn't a white guy or something.
So since it was a Republican idea, be sure to levy any criticism in that direction as well, which I fully expect in your next post.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Funny aside: the ORIGINAL Republican Party under Lincoln was warmly endorsed by one European foreign correspondent who defended it to extreme lengths: Karl Marx.[/QUOTE]
ha ! But with good reason - 150 years ago, Republicans believed in evolution and Democrats owned slaves.
In the early 20th century they kind of switched places.
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]The Real Wizard wrote: [/b] Let us not forget - the Affordable Care Act was entirely based on the Republican alternative to Bill Clinton's universal health care plan, which would have had the US catch up to the rest of the civilized world, with only the insurance companies taking a small pay cut. But the Republicans being on said insurance companies' payroll made this impossible, so they came up with an alternative (which ultimately failed to pass on the federal level).
This plan ended up being the blueprint for Romneycare in Massachusets, so Obama thought - let's use this for the ACA, because the Republicans would vote for it now like they did in 1993, right?
Well, no. Something changed. Maybe the president wasn't a white guy or something.
So since it was a Republican idea, be sure to levy any criticism in that direction as well, which I fully expect in your next post. [/QUOTE]
...
Yep - "Something changed" ... The Democrats morphed Romneycare into something less appetizing:
Romneycare had no new taxes.
Businesses were not required to participate in Romneycare. There was only a paltry $249 penalty per employee.
The penalty for individuals not buying insurance was more severe for Romneycare (about the cost of insurance). Consequently the participation rate for Romneycare was 99% with plenty of healthy people buying insurance.
Most importantly ... Romneycare did not have the oppressive CADILLAC TAX (40% excise tax) of Obamacare.
Yep - "Something changed" ... The Democrats morphed Romneycare into something less appetizing:
Romneycare had no new taxes.
Businesses were not required to participate in Romneycare. There was only a paltry $249 penalty per employee.
The penalty for individuals not buying insurance was more severe for Romneycare (about the cost of insurance). Consequently the participation rate for Romneycare was 99% with plenty of healthy people buying insurance.
Most importantly ... Romneycare did not have the oppressive CADILLAC TAX (40% excise tax) of Obamacare.
But who's to blame - Obama, or the insurance companies got that much more greedy over a 20 year period?
Nobody's denying Obama needed to make concessions to appease all involved, with these guys at the top of the chain - and anyone is naive (and/or nuts) to think otherwise.
It makes one wonder why Republicans aren't in favour of universal health care if it will cost the taxpayers less. Isn't lowering taxes the centrepiece of their entire platform?
Sebastian · Member since
I saw a meme this morning that summarised it quite well: Obamacare is like having firefighters rescuing you and then accidentally hitting your head with a doorframe on the way out. Your head may hurt a bit (i.e. it's not perfect), but at least you're not fucking on fire!
*goodco* · Member since
The recent town hall meeting where Paul Ryan gets chastised
http://www.salon.com/2017/01/13/watch-cancer-patient-tells-paul-ryan-the-affordable-care-act-saved-my-life-during-cnn-town-hall/
The question: rather than trying for x amount of times to repeal it, where was a solution for improvements?
<.....crickets.......>
'We have something better'. It absolutely could have been better. Well then, what is it, and why the wait to disclose it?
Oh, the 'government overreach' crap I've heard. I will never understand how an acquaintance railed against the ACA, even during his wife's long cancer treatments. You see, he was working, and his wife was covered.
How is it fair that my premiums helped offset to pay the expenses for his wife's condition? Sounds awfully 'socialistic' to me. But, geez, I might need that help some day, which is what insurance is all about, isn't it? And I am glad my old acquaintance is not a widower.
While we're at it, amazing how many against the ACA don't want their Medicare or Medicaid touched, and have no clue that this is 'government assistance'.
We pay higher taxes to help subsidize emergency units at all hospitals for nonpayments by those who don't have insurance. The ACA has helped reduce this taxation, but no one mentions it.
The amount of lives the ACA saved from those who couldn't afford simple exams previously runs into the tens of thousands. I personally know a few. As do we all. But, what the hell, I have insurance, so it's not MY problem, so who cares, right?
*goodco* · Member since
What eliminating the ACA could cost my state
http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-aca-maryland-impact-20170119-story.html
Ah, screw it, our bipolar narcissist, as part of his 'caring for all Americans', made sure that on his first day in office, signed an executive order instructing federal agencies to minimize the burden of his predecessor’s signature accomplishment, the Affordable Care Act, pending congressional repeal.
(and the WH website removed any mention of LGBT rights and it looks like we'll be doin' the 'Drill, Baby, Drill' thingy).
YourValentine · Member since
I am sure that "Obamacare" is full of problems and mistakes. We all know that mandatory health care is always under attack by insurance companies, pharma industry, health "industry". The system is usually inefficient and injust on many levels. We always have to work and improve our health care. However, in countries where mandatory legal health care has been installed for decades people simply do not question that everybody has a right to have an affordable health insurance. It is obvious that children, old people, unemployed and low income people need cost free or very cheap health care, that is the idea of social solidarity: who has much can pay much, who has very little can only pay very little and who has nothing needs free health care.
I will never understand why people in the USA do not want that their own children, grandparents and poor neighbours have free or cheap health care - it must be all this Christianity and all the praying.
