Republicans Again Looking Like Bums On Obamacare!

Ok? It's still a demonstrable fact that they do.

What I said is everyone has the same access to care.

 

No they don't, haven't you heard that people that got coverage had a hard time finding a doctor or hospital that accepted their new insurance? Have you heard from people that their drug is no longer covered under their plan?

 

You are incorrect, do your homework please.

 

The prices would not have gone up as high, if they had expanded medicaid and medicare like they were supposed to. Without the expansions, private insurance is forced to cover all of the costs, and the prices went up.

 

Not surprising, most liberals can't see the problem . We have 1,600,000 homeless with a majority VETERANS . We have 16,000,000 unemployed . We have 90,000,000 collect some type of welfare . We have a $19,000,000,000,000 deficit !!! And we have cities that break the law and provide sanctuary to these ILLEGALS .

 

If people are paying thousands of dollars in medical bills/premiums (which some in here have claimed since the inception of the ACA) the average taxpayer will be able to claim his/her medical expenses on their income taxes. That was the point of my post.

 

I never used ACA; I have union negotiated medical benefits; if you read posts after this I mention it was my brother who used ACA and was able to deduct the costs from his income taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Play nice bondo; don't make it personal. Only time I'm going to tell you this.

- - - Updated - - -

I couldn't tell you since I pay taxes like most people I know.

 

How did you arrive at that figure?

 

No no no, healthcare was originally a capitalist institution, and Obama has turned and made it a socialist one. The problem with that is that the capitalist market drives prices down due to competition. Now that the government creates the premiums, they can be whatever they want because they are the ones that control the markets in this case. The reason that this doesn't work is that you eventually run out of other people's money to pay for this type of crap, which we shouldn't be doing in the first place since our gross national debt is approaching $20 trillion.

 

Nothing provides more lucrative benefits (money) to elected politicians, their legislative staffers, and regulatory enforcement lawyers over the course of there lives than a big, tough, long and complex law that only an expert insider an interpret.

That is why we have so many of them.

 

Ayuh,... Because money spend on healthcare is deductible only after it hits that limit,...

Health Insurance premiums are Not deductible,....

Just another way I get screwed, 'n you don't,.....

I pay my insurance with after tax dollars, 'n you don't pay anything at all,....

 

You are wrong.

 

you are talking about health insurance coverage. I am talking about actual health care. Everyone has access to the same care.

they can still get the drug. the access to it hasn't changed.

- - - Updated - - -

I did. it covers the same LIFE SAVING drugs and procedures as private insurance.

 

I stopped reading here since you clearly have no idea what socialism is.

 

No they dont everyone does not accept Medicaid/Medicare and those that do not are usually the best Drs and hospitals.

What if they cant afford it? Some of these drugs cost thousands of dollars a year.

 

Just wasting more time and tax-payer money instead of doing actual work. Shameful.

 

Nope.....the "point of your post" was to bamboozle, baffle and befuddle all by laying the claim that you would get back "most of your monies".
You would never get back ""most of your monies".
Now move on when you're called to the carpet....

 

It appears that both you and I will have to agree to disagree on this thread. End of discussion between the two of us.

- - - Updated - - -

 

All you get to do is take it off your total taxes so all you get back is the taxes you paid on the amount you spent not the whole thing and even then if you made too little you paid no federal taxes to begin with and get nothing meaning the well to do are the ones befitting from it as they should since they pay for it

 

OK, here me out. I think you are totally misunderstanding me.

First of all, remember that the population of permanent residents without documentation isn't increasing. So, the border must be pretty close to being sufficient. So, the desire to spend tens of billions more on fencing and patrols just doesn't make economic sense - especially given the economic facts you point out, the fact that we have sea coasts and a border with Canada. Also, remember that more than 40% of those who are here without papers (that is, illegally) came here LEGALLY - NOT by running the border. So, fencing on the Mexico border is, again, a false focus. I'm saying it is close to good enough - not requiring tens of billions of dollars as demanded by the GOP negotiators of the bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill.


I'm a proponent of the bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill that passed the Senate and would have passed the GOP majority House (were it not for Boehner).

Why?

Admittedly, it has WAY too much money in it for the border (note the above). But, legislation comes from compromise, so I have accepted that. But, the bill also includes methods for addressing the actual problems we face here - e-verify, policing employers with real penalties, changes in our visa system (the major LEGAL way they enter), methods for resolving the problem of those who are here on a permanent basis.

Better job policing will cause fewer to come here. And, we can not round up those who are here. The real problem with them is that they are not allowed to work to pay their own way. Making it illegal to work causes strain on health care and other support systems. AND, it creates an underground economy of cheap, unrepresented, unprotected labor that US citizens simply can not compete with. Those who have been here a long time are unlikely to leave, because they have family members who know nothing of some other country. We can say "tough for you", but the problems you point out aren't those that are "tough" for them - they are the ones that are "tough" for us, and demanding that these people not work is definitely "tough" for us, as you point out.

 

Obama Care is why the Democrats lost 69 seats in Congress in 2010. There must be some part of "WE DON'T WANT IT" the Democrats just don't seem to understand.

 

There aren't any jobs for them that's why. We need about 225,000 NEW jobs (not just openings of old jobs) every month just to keep up with normal population growth. November 2015 job growth was 215,000.

 

Instead of just ending federal involvement in healthcare and using that revenue to create large patient owned healthcare accounts the GOP will undoubtedly "fix" ObamaCare with yet another massive law.

 

Lets hope not. If Trump is elected possibly.