• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Biggest Reform EVER passed thread

somehow this belongs in the discussion. The John Candy character is the 1%er, and the John Diehl character is palma

 
It doesn't strike you as silly to enact a bill that forces americans to overpay for a health insurance premium, when every large corporation just self-insures and pays much less? Just a terrible bill. There are ways to take care of those with pre-existing conditions without fucking everyone else.
 
I dunno how many Urgent Care centers get 5* on Yelp, it's almost as if you take the regulations out of it, the good/cheap providers get highly reviewed, attract attention from new customers and the market takes care of itself.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/dtla-urgent-care-los-angeles-2

Conversely, The yelp rating of the medical group my insurance directed me to is 1.5*
 
Last edited:
No.

Because health insurance is necessary (generally/collectively--not for every minor thing) for good, high quality modern health care and it would work better for everyone if we all participated in a plan or plans throughout our lives. Where we all (have to) pay in, reasonably and progressively (as reasonably able). And if then we could enjoy good care as we needed it. Without becoming bankrupt due to illness or injury.

Now it doesn't have to be the ACA. Could be Medicare for all. But the ACA, if supported and adjusted over time could have been a decent enough vehicle.

No, from my vantage point I work with folks every day who are destitute due to their health care costs. And even with "good" insurance can't get (insurance to pay for) the help they need. The answer is not to destroy everything but to make it better. And yes, getting everyone to participate is part of what can make it better.
 
ConnorEl said:
Yea, what could go wrong with not having health insurance? Health care is generally so affordable if you just pay for it when you need it.
Click to expand...

If I were forced to pay for health insurance since I graduated college myself at the current rates it would have cost me about $60k. I spent about $3k. Not everyone has the same risk tolerance, and it's downright unamerican to force people to buy something they don't want or need.

There certainly are solutions that don't involve forcing most people to waste $57,000 dollars during that time period to take care of the rare people who require significant care.

People don't pay for it when given the choice. Corporations who are large enough to handle the risks don't pay for it because they know how math works. So why enact laws that just enable the system to continue to be inefficient?
 
Last edited:
Palma despite trolling makes a great Republican/boomer, the fuck you I got mine. Empathy for those that have less, trying to better the country etc... should be a welcome cost for living in society. That’s what people are trying to say, if the tax cuts were about middle class and poor then the rich shouldn’t even be in the conversation, separate from all the other horrible aspect with the cuts sunsetting. The poor and middle class should get cuts, after that upper middle class, and last rich. I don’t care if I don’t get a cut, I do care if I get a fake cut or no cut and some billionaire gets permanent cuts. I
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Palma despite trolling makes a great Republican/boomer, the fuck you I got mine. Empathy for those that have less, trying to better the country etc... should be a welcome cost for living in society. That’s what people are trying to say, if the tax cuts were about middle class and poor then the rich shouldn’t even be in the conversation, separate from all the other horrible aspect with the cuts sunsetting. The poor and middle class should get cuts, after that upper middle class, and last rich. I don’t care if I don’t get a cut, I do care if I get a fake cut or no cut and some billionaire gets permanent cuts. I
Click to expand...

If dems could be trusted to vote in their constituents interests, there would be 60 votes and I'm sure the Pubs would be fine making the new brackets permanent as well. But, alas.
 
Yep, I guess it is un-American.

I mean we do have a truly deplorable system. But hey, it's American.

Sad!
 
Last edited:
Democrats would gladly vote for tax reform that helps middle and lower income individuals, you know what would actually help people.
 
palmab03 said:
If I were forced to pay for health insurance since I graduated college myself at the current rates it would have cost me about $60k. I spent about $3k. Not everyone has the same risk tolerance, and it's downright unamerican to force people to buy something they don't want or need.

There certainly are solutions that don't involve forcing most people to waste $57,000 dollars during that time period to take care of the rare people who require significant care.

People don't pay for it when given the choice. Corporations who are large enough to handle the risks don't pay for it because they know how math works. So why enact laws that just enable the system to continue to be inefficient?
Click to expand...

#ancedotes
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Democrats would gladly vote for tax reform that helps middle and lower income individuals, you know what would actually help people.
Click to expand...

The reason the Dems won't vote for it is there are one or two things they don't like like it does disproportionately hurt NY and CA, the estate tax and the mandate. Not because it won't help most lower and middle income people. The dems will basically only vote yes if it gives them everything they want despite having control of no brach of government. And you know why they don't have control over any brach of the government? The Pubs keep out maneuvering them like in this, you've got Dems unanimously opposing things that saves 90% of the people money in year 1. Beyond retarded.
 
Last edited:
Have you taken a gander at the public approval for the tax plan, opposing it is the popular thing to do. Looks like a certain group isn’t doing what their constituents really want.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Have you taken a gander at the public approval for the tax plan, opposing it is the popular thing to do. Looks like a certain group isn’t doing what their constituents really want.
Click to expand...

Yes, its mind boggling. But goes in line with how most people on this thread apparently didn't know how tax brackets worked. If 90% of the people actually would save money starting in 45 days and knew that, do you think the support would really be that low?

This is why fake news is a problem. Or people just hate everything congress does no matter what.
 
palmab03 said:
Yes, its mind boggling. But goes in line with how most people on this thread apparently didn't know how tax brackets worked. If 90% of the people actually would save money starting in 45 days and knew that, do you think the support would really be that low?

This is why fake news is a problem. Or people just hate everything congress does no matter what.
Click to expand...

“Save $60 a month so the CEO can save $10,000.”

It’s a wonder that approval is so low.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
“Save $60 a month so the CEO can save $10,000.”

It’s a wonder that approval is so low.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that's similar to "Keep working without a raise so your CEO can get a raise." That still works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top