(03-08-2017 10:00 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:25 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 08:22 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:30 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 12:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Going to a consumption tax paradigm makes sense in many ways. That is why it will probably never happen. It takes power away from politicians by ending withholding. Imagine how great it would be to never have to file a tax return again?

No, no, a thousand times NO. No more taxes. We already have plenty of them. Why are you so desperate to pile on more taxes to the littany we already pay?

Still don't have the faintest of clues I see.

Every proposal Ive seen includes repealing the 16th amendment and REPLACING it with a consumption tax. I have no idea how it could be added taxation..nor...will Conn do us the favor of explaining his contention. Every time this subject comes up?...Conn visits us with the same post. Im open BTW to being proven wrong.

You've repeatedly stated the 16th amendment repeal is proposed in your beloved HR25, and IMO that's complete garbage. As I've stated before, the 16th amendment is going nowhere. This consumption tax you're so gung ho about is simply going to be added on to the myriad of taxes we already pay. It's my opinion and it's an opinion based on D.C. precedence. Can you name me all the taxes D.C. has repealed/taken off the books?

HR25 includes the repeal of the 16th. BTW... Ive never once said I thought it could be enacted. It would take away power of the government to reach into our pockets via withholding. It would be a very hard thing to get through Congress..but..that makes it no less an outstanding piece of legislation.

(03-09-2017 12:36 AM)john01992 Wrote:  all I see is cherry picking on your part.
thank you for proving why I think you are a bit of a ---case

As I've said before, you have a much higher regard for me than I do for you.

(03-08-2017 09:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:38 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:35 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:25 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 08:22 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Still don't have the faintest of clues I see.

Every proposal Ive seen includes repealing the 16th amendment and REPLACING it with a consumption tax. I have no idea how it could be added taxation..nor...will Conn do us the favor of explaining his contention. Every time this subject comes up?...Conn visits us with the same post. Im open BTW to being proven wrong.

FFS that is advocating shifting the tax burden from the rich to the poor. do you really support this?

Not so John. HR25 in fact would totally untax the poor via the prebate and no sales tax would be levied on used goods...giving the poor even more buying power with their money. What else do you want to know?

and hasn't that whole prebate issue been proven to be unworkable? a lot of cons on here pretty much conceded that when John Oliver did a segment on how ridiclious Gary Johnson's proposals were.

Im not particularly impressed with the thoughts of comedians like Oliver on serious topics like this. Ive seen no credible evidence to suggest that the prebate would not work fine. The Democrats/Socialists hate it because it would actually HELP the less fortunate.... Something they claim they can do and yet have been an abject failure at doing since they enacted the "war on poverty".

(03-09-2017 06:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:38 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:35 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 09:25 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Every proposal Ive seen includes repealing the 16th amendment and REPLACING it with a consumption tax. I have no idea how it could be added taxation..nor...will Conn do us the favor of explaining his contention. Every time this subject comes up?...Conn visits us with the same post. Im open BTW to being proven wrong.

FFS that is advocating shifting the tax burden from the rich to the poor. do you really support this?

Not so John. HR25 in fact would totally untax the poor via the prebate and no sales tax would be levied on used goods...giving the poor even more buying power with their money. What else do you want to know?

and hasn't that whole prebate issue been proven to be unworkable? a lot of cons on here pretty much conceded that when John Oliver did a segment on how ridiclious Gary Johnson's proposals were.

Im not particularly impressed with the thoughts of comedians like Oliver on serious topics like this. Ive seen no credible evidence to suggest that the prebate would not work fine. The Democrats/Socialists hate it because it would actually HELP the less fortunate.... Something they claim they can do and yet have been an abject failure at doing since they enacted the "war on poverty".

The only reservation I have for the prebates is I think they will be largely blown on schit like xBoxes, iPhones, tattoos, vacations, booze, and drugs. But in principle, I believe in personal responsibility, so that isn't a dealbreaker for me.

(03-08-2017 06:53 PM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:41 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:27 PM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:16 PM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  This is not a new concept and has been in place for Medicare Part D since its inception. The Part D penalty is a 1% surcharge for every month that you delay taking Part D. For example, if you wait 12 months to get a Part D policy, you will pay a 12% surcharge FOREVER.

I think this is a good addition to the bill and will help to alleviate the adverse selection problem.

Depends how it's written. If some poor sap has financial problems and misses his premium payments and gets dropped and there's no provision for him to get back on the plan without paying these huge fines and penalties, he's not going to do it. That's pretty harsh and will hurt more than a few Trump supporters.

No plan is ever going to cover every possible situation that you could imagine. If you try to do that, you end up with a total mess.

Yet even with Obamacare, there are still 30 million uninsured. Is that success?

Yes. Considering where we were. And just think how good it would be if the R's actually embraced their idea and worked to make it work better.

Holy crap. You actually are blaming the Republicans for Obamacare's failures. Now that's precious.

I said nothing of the sort. Without the obstruction, but instead passing laws to address the things they hate about it, they could have made it work much better.

(03-08-2017 07:00 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:23 PM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 04:47 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 04:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  As I said...I did not remember the exact scenario they ran.

This doc has the particulars: http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/pol...7-2017.pdf

AARP... That explains a lot.

So does the NRA wanting the mentally handicapped to own guns and for silencers to be legal so hunting dogs don't lose their hearing, but that doesn't seem to be an issue for the right.

But hey...feel free to provide your own analysis of the plan so that if fits your new leader's lie of better and cheaper for everyone, while still keeping your own doctors, and all the other bull**** he promised...lol. But oh wait...he doesn't have to be taken literally on anything he spews. God love you cons.

Most of AARP's income is from selling Medigap insurance, so they are not exactly a objective observer. And when the original Obamacare had a provision to drastically cut the Medicare Advantage program, AARP was stunningly silent. Could it have been because Medicare Advantage cuts into Medigap sales?

Winner winner chicken dinner. AARP is reporting on their best interest as much as the insured

And what about the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Hospital Association?

And the America's Health Insurance Plans, representing insurers, who praised GOP provisions like erasing health industry taxes but warned that proposed Medicaid changes "could result in unnecessary disruptions in the coverage and care beneficiaries depend on."?
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/f...e-45984922

There were disruptions when Obummercare was implemented. There will always be disruptions.

Let's stop the Earth turning. Disruptions.

(03-09-2017 10:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 07:00 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:23 PM)LeFlâneur Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 04:47 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  AARP... That explains a lot.

So does the NRA wanting the mentally handicapped to own guns and for silencers to be legal so hunting dogs don't lose their hearing, but that doesn't seem to be an issue for the right.

But hey...feel free to provide your own analysis of the plan so that if fits your new leader's lie of better and cheaper for everyone, while still keeping your own doctors, and all the other bull**** he promised...lol. But oh wait...he doesn't have to be taken literally on anything he spews. God love you cons.

Most of AARP's income is from selling Medigap insurance, so they are not exactly a objective observer. And when the original Obamacare had a provision to drastically cut the Medicare Advantage program, AARP was stunningly silent. Could it have been because Medicare Advantage cuts into Medigap sales?

Winner winner chicken dinner. AARP is reporting on their best interest as much as the insured

And what about the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Hospital Association?

Left out this little nugget:

Quote:Seven years ago their backing was instrumental in enacting President Barack Obama's health care statute, which President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are intent on erasing.

Are you surprised that groups which strongly supported Obamacare are now opposed to doing away with it?

(03-09-2017 10:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And the America's Health Insurance Plans, representing insurers, who praised GOP provisions like erasing health industry taxes but warned that proposed Medicaid changes "could result in unnecessary disruptions in the coverage and care beneficiaries depend on."?
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/f...e-45984922

I looked over AHIP's website and couldn't find a report detailing their comment. Will there be disruptions? Probably. I think that's unavoidable, but everybody involved should make sure there are as few as possible. Notice AHIP didn't mention people losing coverage outright. That's telling, especially given their earlier comments about looking forward to working with the administration on Obamacare's replacement.

The VAST majority of medicaid recipients enrolled under Obama's medicaid expansion were already eligible.


All that said, I'm not defending the plan by any means. I think it stinks and there is too much govt control still.

That presentation by Paul Ryan was brutal. Used car salesman-esque.

I want more information on the risk pools and how they will be funded/subsidized. Pre-ACA, Texas risk pool premiums were around $1000/month. If we go back to that, the GOP is signing their own death warrant.

(03-09-2017 12:28 PM)Kronke Wrote:  That presentation by Paul Ryan was brutal. Used car salesman-esque.

I want more information on the risk pools and how they will be funded/subsidized. Pre-ACA, Texas risk pool premiums were around $1000/month. If we go back to that, the GOP is signing their own death warrant.

just curious, what were the deductibles on those high-risk policies pre Obamacare?

(03-09-2017 12:37 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:28 PM)Kronke Wrote:  That presentation by Paul Ryan was brutal. Used car salesman-esque.

I want more information on the risk pools and how they will be funded/subsidized. Pre-ACA, Texas risk pool premiums were around $1000/month. If we go back to that, the GOP is signing their own death warrant.

just curious, what were the deductibles on those high-risk policies pre Obamacare?

Depends on the state, but Texas' deductibles ranged from $500-$5k, all plans were 80/20, w/ $3k MOOP.

The upside was that it was a PPO and your list of providers was endless. Under Obamacare plans, you have essentially no choice and you're lucky if your network has more than a single provider in any given specialty.

(03-09-2017 12:40 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:37 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:28 PM)Kronke Wrote:  That presentation by Paul Ryan was brutal. Used car salesman-esque.

I want more information on the risk pools and how they will be funded/subsidized. Pre-ACA, Texas risk pool premiums were around $1000/month. If we go back to that, the GOP is signing their own death warrant.

just curious, what were the deductibles on those high-risk policies pre Obamacare?

Depends on the state, but Texas' deductibles ranged from $500-$5k, all plans were 80/20, w/ $3k MOOP.

That doesn't sound that bad actually. It's a high-risk pool for a reason. Insurance companies are being asked to pay for something that's already happened rather than insuring against a possible future loss.

A $400 per month individual policy in NC with a $6000 deductible puts one at $10,800. The Texas high-risk pool at $1000 a month and a median $2500 deductible is just $14,500. $3,700 to cover a known condition is honestly a pretty good deal.

As-is, the current plan is a huge pile of steaming ****. It's embarrassing that it was even put forth after all this time they've had to work on it.

(03-09-2017 12:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:40 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:37 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 12:28 PM)Kronke Wrote:  That presentation by Paul Ryan was brutal. Used car salesman-esque.

I want more information on the risk pools and how they will be funded/subsidized. Pre-ACA, Texas risk pool premiums were around $1000/month. If we go back to that, the GOP is signing their own death warrant.

just curious, what were the deductibles on those high-risk policies pre Obamacare?

Depends on the state, but Texas' deductibles ranged from $500-$5k, all plans were 80/20, w/ $3k MOOP.

That doesn't sound that bad actually. It's a high-risk pool for a reason. Insurance companies are being asked to pay for something that's already happened rather than insuring against a possible future loss.

A $400 per month individual policy in NC with a $6000 deductible puts one at $10,800. The Texas high-risk pool at $1000 a month and a median $2500 deductible is just $14,500. $3,700 to cover a known condition is honestly a pretty good deal.

As-is, the current plan is a huge pile of steaming ****. It's embarrassing that it was even put forth after all this time they've had to work on it.

That's not how it's going to be framed. Dems will find and parade out the single mothers with health problems that make $20-25k/year, whose Obamacare plans cost next to nothing and paid for everything, and play Trump's promises of "better and less expensive for everyone" over it.

i think they will play. We're not going to let people not get insurance. Not going to have people dying in the streets over and over and over til 2018. This plan is going to hurt a lot of Trump voters in the Midwest.

(03-09-2017 01:16 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  i think they will play. We're not going to let people not get insurance.Not going to have people dying in the streets over and over and over til 2018. This plan is going to hurt a lot of Trump voters in the Midwest.

Was this occurring before Obamacare? How about afterwards?

(03-09-2017 01:16 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  i think they will play. We're not going to let people not get insurance. Not going to have people dying in the streets over and over and over til 2018. This plan is going to hurt a lot of Trump voters in the Midwest.

(03-07-2017 04:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I assume you don't want what we had before the ACA, where the costs were increasing yearly by the same or more with the ACA,

Source?

Sorry for the delay, but here you go.

Quote:Today, the average cost of a family health insurance offered by an employer is $13,375. That’s up 131% over the last decade—a period in which inflation rose only 28%. And one estimate says that if costs continue on their current trajectory, premiums will go up another 166% in the decade ahead.

Health Insurance Premiums Up 131% in Last Ten Years

Conversely:

Quote:After plan design changes and vendor negotiations, the average health care rate increase for mid-size and large companies was 3.2 percent in 2015, marking the lowest rate increase since 1996, according to a new analysis by Aon.

Aon projects average premium increases will jump to 4.1 percent in 2016.

U.S. Health Care Cost Increases at Lowest Rate in Nearly 20 years

(03-09-2017 02:41 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I assume you don't want what we had before the ACA, where the costs were increasing yearly by the same or more with the ACA,

Source?

Sorry for the delay, but here you go.

Quote:Today, the average cost of a family health insurance offered by an employer is $13,375. That’s up 131% over the last decade—a period in which inflation rose only 28%. And one estimate says that if costs continue on their current trajectory, premiums will go up another 166% in the decade ahead.

Health Insurance Premiums Up 131% in Last Ten Years

Conversely:

Quote:After plan design changes and vendor negotiations, the average health care rate increase for mid-size and large companies was 3.2 percent in 2015, marking the lowest rate increase since 1996, according to a new analysis by Aon.

Aon projects average premium increases will jump to 4.1 percent in 2016.

U.S. Health Care Cost Increases at Lowest Rate in Nearly 20 years

Your articles are inconclusive. From your second article:

Quote:Despite the low rate of increase, the average amount that employees need to contribute toward their health care has increased more than 134 percent over the past decade.

Since the two sets of data overlap, a more in depth look is needed. If we are simply using a rolling average, 1999-2009 saw 131% increase, while 2005-2015 saw a 134% increase. Contradictory to your claim that rates were "increasing the same or more" prior to Obamacare.

So there you go.

So Obamacare is working. That's what I thought. That needs to be repeated from every rooftop