Proper Steps to MAGA?

[hollodero]

(07-20-2017, 08:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The robbed bit isn't egocentrical. When someone says "oh, by the way, you don't want or need this, but give me your money anyway or I am throwing you in jail" that is most certainly robbery.

By that standard you would have to call taxes robbery as well. Which maybe you do :) but I wouldn't go that far.

(07-20-2017, 08:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: They throw around the 20m people who got health insurance because of it number, but note there's never any research done on how many of that 20m *DIDN'T WANT IT*.
Or how many people who already had health insurance are now finding their deductibles and premiums skyrocketing to the point where sure they technically have insurance on paper, but now they can no longer afford to use it. My parents are pretty much in that group. It's shit to see because they have worked hard for it only to have it essentially snatched away to give to people who didn't work hard for it under the guise of a better world, and they are middle class at best.

I get skyrocketing premiums and why that is a shame, but if any the penalties would to some extent cap that effect. Or maybe I get that wrong. But in my view, if only people needing it would have insurance, premiums would be bound to be even higher, otherwise it wouldn't be profitable for insurers. Forcing those who feel they don't need insurance into the system benefits those in need.
Apart from that, I would have to ask how people like your parents would have less costly insurance if there weren't Obamacare. What would keep their premiums down? (There might be a clear answer, but I wouldn't know. Was there considerably more competition and market pressure before Obamacare?)

So, sure, unaffordable premiums need to be fixed, and I guess no one argues that. I think one could address that problem with a public option. Seems to make sense. But I'm very naive sometimes. I would even argue that the ubiquitous profit motive in healthcare is the root of most problems. Clearly I'm not a Libertarian.

(07-20-2017, 08:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: That's the one thing. The other, I don't really grasp who they are giving it to.

Meanwhile my friends who were already working 2 jobs in order to pay their bills and student loans, are getting $695 taken away from them just so they can opt out of something they neither wanted nor needed.

Might sound a bit curmudgeon-y, but shit medically was a LOT better from my perspective a decade ago.

Yeah, I see a deeper economical problem there. Which would be the student loans and that one job doesn't pay well enough to get along. I see a bit of irony complaining about the health care bill there and not foremost about those other things. Doesn't mean I ridicule the situation.

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

(07-20-2017, 08:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: As for Sanders, his plan was never a good one. I think I read it would have meant like 20% of everyone's income would go towards paying for what he proposed.

Yeah, I wouldn't know, too much detail. If it were 20%, it wouldn't be a good plan. We really insure everybody and pay I think around 8% income overall (including what the employer pays, which is half of that I guess - a divide which, of course, is meaningless in the end).