Trump's First 100 Days

[BmorePat87]

Details of the leaked Republican ACA replacement

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/24/14726916/leaked-republican-obamacare-replacement-plan-explained

Cliffnotes:

-$100b for pools for high risk (pre-existing conditions) but this is just to help. If there's a lapse in coverage (say between jobs), you can be charged higher prices.

-No mandated coverage

-No mandated benefits with plans, you can get as little as you want. In addition to this, insurance companies no longer are capped at only charging elderly people 3x's what they charge younger people, they can charge them as much as they want.

-Tax credits are based on age, not income. Bill Gates will get twice as much assistance in the form as tax credits than I will.

-Medicare expansion repealed. States can keep it, but there's no funding.

-Obama's "Cadillac tax" on really cushy plans from employers that Republicans said they hated is back. Necessary to pay for this, but bound to be unpopular with people.

[GMDino]

(02-27-2017, 02:56 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Health Care is apparently really complicated. No one knew this.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/321318-trump-nobody-knew-that-healthcare-could-be-so-complicated

Dude said this straight faced, no sarcasm what-so-ever...

Eight years...and they didn't realize it?  Color me stunned.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-27-2017, 03:07 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Multiple personality disorder.  

Bi-personality curious

[*michaelsean*]

(02-27-2017, 03:38 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Bi-personality curious

I may have experimented with it in college.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-27-2017, 03:44 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I may have experimented with it in college.

Hey, you were two wild and crazy guys. 

[BengalHawk62]

For those in the "know", is pregnancy considered 'pre-existing'?

[GMDino]

(02-27-2017, 04:13 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: For those in the "know", is pregnancy considered 'pre-existing'?

It was when my wife and I had our first child 19 years ago.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-27-2017, 04:13 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: For those in the "know", is pregnancy considered 'pre-existing'?

That is a good question. I don't know. My best guess is it would probably vary from company to company depending upon how much they guard their bottom line vs. value their customers. 

[*michaelsean*]

(02-27-2017, 04:13 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: For those in the "know", is pregnancy considered 'pre-existing'?

I would say it would be.  

[*bfine32*]

Figured I'd bring up his first Address to joint Congress here as those that make numerous threads daily about Trump apparently find it not to be news worthy enough for its own. (I'll bet if he would have say they went referring to his Generals or had some folders with wrong size papers, there'd be a backlog).

As many National pundits have said I thought it was quite successful and I like the Dem from WV without knowing anything about him. When Trump mentioned coal miners, as the rest of the Dems sat on their hands with their lips poked out, he said F you guys and stood up and applauded vigorously.

I liked his focus on infrastructure and our Nation. I also liked his statement that his job is not to do what is best for the world, but what is best for America. If I were to point to a low point it was when he stressed Latino and Blacks when he mentioned the benefits of his education reform. I also wish he would quit saying the Government Civilian hiring freeze excludes the Military; because it is killing me.

[GMDino]

(03-01-2017, 02:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Figured I'd bring up his first Address to joint Congress here as those that make numerous threads daily about Trump apparently find it not to be news worthy enough for its own. (I'll bet if he would have say they went referring to his Generals or had some folders with wrong size papers, there'd be a backlog).

As many National pundits have said I thought it was quite successful and I like the Dem from WV without knowing anything about him. When Trump mentioned coal miners, as the rest of the Dems sat on their hands with their lips poked out, he said F you guys and stood up and applauded vigorously.

I liked his focus on infrastructure and our Nation. I also liked his statement that his job is not to do what is best for the world, but what is best for America. If I were to point to a low point it was when he stressed Latino and Blacks when he mentioned the benefits of his education reform. I also wish he would quit saying the Government Civilian hiring freeze excludes the Military; because it is killing me.

Of course the guy from WV stood...he wants votes from coal miners too.  Doesn't matter if neither of them want to admit its a dying industry.

I agree on the investing in infrastructure.  Wish the GOP would have agreed over the last eight years also.

He also said he got us out of the TPP...he didn't.  We were never in it.

He also said he's going to cut everyone's taxes...increase spending...and get us out of debt.  I swear I've heard that snake oil pitch before.

Something things I liked, some I didn't.  But over all it was another campaign speech to the congress to get them ready to support his ideas.  No better than any of the SOTU speeches I've ever heard.

[*bfine32*]

Oh, I forgot to add that the Dem's rebuttal was high comedy.

I never knew Breshears was a proud Republican first.

[Griever]

i also like how he kept saying everyone would have ACCESS to healthcare

ACCESS to and having healthcare are two completely different things

[Belsnickel]

(03-01-2017, 02:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: He also said he's going to cut everyone's taxes...increase spending...and get us out of debt.  I swear I've heard that snake oil pitch before.

This is the thing that gets me in all of this. So far with what we have heard about his budget plan is a sizeable increase to military spending coming from domestic discretionary spending, and nothing on entitlements.

Now, I'm not for just slashing entitlement spending like some are. The money that is marked for those funds needs to stay that way, but we need to reform the programs and work on efficiency. But I just can't fathom how increasing a defense budget that already makes up one-third of the world's military spending as a whole when we have a growing debt and lots of problems to fix at home makes any sense. I would wager there are some places in there that could use some efficiency overhauls.

Strategic planning has been making its way into the public sector from the private for a couple of decades now, maybe that is something that a business leader should bring to the federal government. Could help them going forward.

[hollodero]

(03-01-2017, 02:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Figured I'd bring up his first Address to joint Congress here as those that make numerous threads daily about Trump apparently find it not to be news worthy enough for its own. (I'll bet if he would have say they went referring to his Generals or had some folders with wrong size papers, there'd be a backlog).

As many National pundits have said I thought it was quite successful and I like the Dem from WV without knowing anything about him. When Trump mentioned coal miners, as the rest of the Dems sat on their hands with their lips poked out, he said F you guys and stood up and applauded vigorously.

I liked his focus on infrastructure and our Nation. I also liked his statement that his job is not to do what is best for the world, but what is best for America. If I were to point to a low point it was when he stressed Latino and Blacks when he mentioned the benefits of his education reform. I also wish he would quit saying the Government Civilian hiring freeze excludes the Military; because it is killing me.

I thought it was a bunch of nothing but rhetorics and empty words, not really worth an own thread. But well. He wants to reduce taxes, fix the infrastructure, build a wall and sharply increase defense spending - and I still don't have a single clue how he wants to pay for all that. I feel that this should bother some people. 
(Especially those who blocked all the infrastructure investments Obama suggested.)

So since you brought it up - who pays for all this? What's the fiscally responsible plan here.

[NATI BENGALS]

Was there anything new?

He tooted his own horn for much of the first part. How long are these pipeline jobs going to last? And who makes the real profit?

Then talked about building a great wall and dumping money in to the military. And then spoke of his desire to seek and win a war.

FDA regulations seem a little rediculous. But flooding the market with a bunch of under tested drugs could be a disaster.

His anti drug rhetoric is ramping up. The marijuana industry which is about the only place he could pull this magically money from that he wants to spend could be in real trouble.

Lets pretend we wont spend bigly on both a wall and infrastructure. I think i know which one he would pick and it would benefit us the lesser of the two.

[*bfine32*]

(03-01-2017, 03:50 PM)hollodero Wrote: I thought it was a bunch of nothing but rhetorics and empty words, not really worth an own thread. But well. He wants to reduce taxes, fix the infrastructure, build a wall (I don't think he mentioned that, but well) and sharply increase defense spending - and I still don't have a single clue how he wants to pay for all that. I feel that this should bother some people. 
(Especially those who blocked all the infrastructure investments Obama suggested.)

So since you brought it up - who pays for all this? What's the fiscally responsible plan here.

This is common for a State of the Union (I know); however, most are usually commented on. I would say it's a lot more "thread worthy" than some of the stuff we've seen on here lately; but that's just one man's opinion.

He did mention the wall and I think his plan to pay is mentioned as far as taxing imports and cutting for other programs. 

[*michaelsean*]

(03-01-2017, 02:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: Of course the guy from WV stood...he wants votes from coal miners too.  Doesn't matter if neither of them want to admit its a dying industry.

I agree on the investing in infrastructure.  Wish the GOP would have agreed over the last eight years also.

He also said he got us out of the TPP...he didn't.  We were never in it.

He also said he's going to cut everyone's taxes...increase spending...and get us out of debt.  I swear I've heard that snake oil pitch before.

Something things I liked, some I didn't.  But over all it was another campaign speech to the congress to get them ready to support his ideas.  No better than any of the SOTU speeches I've ever heard.

Didn't we spend close to a trillion dollars on infrastructure in 2009?  

[hollodero]

(03-01-2017, 04:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He did mention the wall and I think his plan to pay is mentioned as far as taxing imports and cutting for other programs. 

I just figured he mentioned the wall; and serious question, do you think that (tariffs and cutting programs) is a realistic plan to fund all that? It's not "just" the wall, but all these other things too. Plus, he wants to bring down national debt too.

Again, not a sarcastic or trick question, I am just curious if one might think that can work out. (My stance is clear, I think it's all mere populism. But what do I know.)

[Goalpost]

I did not hear anything new but I am still comfortable that I voted for him. Thought the speech was a bit long but not sure what the norm is. But he covered a lot of topics and kept things on point. CNN poll showed it was received favorably.