The middle class won today

Quetzal · Mar 25, 2017

esmith said:
How about a huge amount of fat.
I was thinking (yeah I know it hurts my head) but when I was working for Sun Microsystems the company had a very basic health plan that they paid for (can't remember the details it was over 20 years ago). The employees could purchase additional coverage (again can't remember the details) to what ever they thought they needed. I can't see why this type of plan couldn't work. Except that the federal government would not pay for the basic plan unless except in "hardship" cases and the individual could pay additional for any expanded coverage.

This sort of still works? (story time!) I mean, my place of employment offers different levels that deduct different amounts from my paycheck which is matched (I think) by the employer. So, for me, I am in good health so I am enrolled in the basic tier. My deductible is higher because I do not have a recurring issue and don't have as many office visits. However, I do have an out of pocket maximum and a small pool of money for routine visits/the cold/etc. With that sort of program, my deduction every two weeks is lower than someone in the higher tiers. Now, if you were to ask me where the state/federal funding to my program starts and stops, I could not tell you. I am also not sure how the ACA plays into it since I got this position after it was implemented, so I have nothing to compare it to.

idav · Mar 25, 2017

tytlyf said:
Thankfully, the ACA is here to stay. Republicans don't like it because it hurts profits. The middle class has taken a victory against these greedy corporations. Good job everyone, that includes republicans who realized they don't want their healthcare taken away.

House GOP Leaders Pull Paul Ryan's Obamacare 2.0 Bill Off Floor Again - Breitbart

I don't know about everyone else but insurance rates were way worse before Obamacare, especially if you want to get health for a spouse, and we have been through various plans through the years. We've dealt with state funded, medicaid, work funded, private insurances, all kinds. I also remember the state funded, before Obamacare, being limited and not being able to cover everyone. I'd hate if we end up on their proposed block program.

tytlyf · Mar 25, 2017

I don't understand this conservative obsession with 'regulations.' Regulations are good things, not bad. Regulations are safety laws, rules to reign in corruption and greed. Protect your health, make sure there aren't monopolies...etc.

Stop being a corporate apologist. But as we know, republicans don't have middle class policies.

It's a corporate policy to hate regulations because they hurt profits. It's easier (cheaper) to dump pollution into the ocean than to have to follow some horrific (not as cheap) regulation

Quetzal · Mar 25, 2017

tytlyf said:
I don't understand this conservative obsession with 'regulations.' Regulations are good things, not bad. Regulations are safety laws, rules to reign in corruption and greed. Protect your health, make sure there aren't monopolies...etc.

To be fair, the regulations in the scope of this thread were referring to me asking if they would prefer starting over or amending. And given the number of regulations, the argument is made that a reset might be easier. It has some merit.

Sorry if this isn't what you are referring to. If you are making a general statement, feel free to ignore the previous sentences.

tytlyf · Mar 26, 2017

Quetzal said:
To be fair, the regulations in the scope of this thread were referring to me asking if they would prefer starting over or amending. And given the number of regulations, the argument is made that a reset might be easier. It has some merit.

Sorry if this isn't what you are referring to. If you are making a general statement, feel free to ignore the previous sentences.

But which regulations? Which specific regulations? People don't talk about specifics, just "we need to get rid of regulations." That's dangerous and doing the bidding of corporations.

Shadow Wolf · Mar 26, 2017

tytlyf said:
But which regulations? Which specific regulations? People don't talk about specifics, just "we need to get rid of regulations." That's dangerous and doing the bidding of corporations.

Even staunch Conservatives like clean air and water and keeping them that way when you get them away from "regulations" parrots.

Quetzal · Mar 26, 2017

tytlyf said:
But which regulations? Which specific regulations? People don't talk about specifics, just "we need to get rid of regulations." That's dangerous and doing the bidding of corporations.

Maybe, but let's try another angle. What regulations do you think are worth keeping?

tytlyf · Mar 26, 2017

Quetzal said:
Maybe, but let's try another angle. What regulations do you think are worth keeping?

Regulations are safety laws that protect Americans. They also prevent crime and corruption. Removing regulations won't benefit you, it'll benefit corporations.

Quetzal · Mar 26, 2017

tytlyf said:
Regulations are safety laws that protect Americans. They also prevent crime and corruption. Removing regulations won't benefit you, it'll benefit corporations.

Be specific, which?

tytlyf · Mar 26, 2017

Quetzal said:
Be specific, which?

Start with this. Are these regulations horrible? What is the purpose behind them? Regulations usually need to be introduced after a problem has been exposed.

Quetzal · Mar 26, 2017

tytlyf said:
Start with this. Are these regulations horrible? What is the purpose behind them? Regulations usually need to be introduced after a problem has been exposed.
View attachment 16560

These regulations are not related to the topic presented in the OP. Those are the regulations I am interested in.

Mister_T · Mar 27, 2017

metis said:
A single-payer system using non-profit insurance companies operating under strict rules is not only sensible, it works in practice as we're seeing with the Germans, who have been doing universal health care longer than any other nation, and the Danes, who decided to mimic the German system about two years ago.

Why do Americans constantly feel that they have to reinvent the wheel whereas there are many countries with universal health care, better outcomes (according to the W.H.O.), and they're doing it with less cost. Dah!

Exactly. The U.S. middle class won't win until this country decides it wants to catch up with the rest of the modern world and make healthcare an essential public good and not a for-profit venture for health insurance CEO's.

Of course having Trumpcare fall flat on it's face is definitely a good thing, though American's healthcare is still in a bad place. All that was prevented was making a bad situation turn into an absolute abysmal one and there's still no guarantee that stooges like Paul Ryan or the Freedom Caucus won't try their hand again at pushing some craptacular plan.

tytlyf · Mar 27, 2017

Quetzal said:
These regulations are not related to the topic presented in the OP. Those are the regulations I am interested in.

I started this thread and didn't mention regulations in the OP. That's the problem with republicans, they aren't specific on what regulations. They don't point out which regulations they don't like. They basically want all regulations eliminated.

But feel free to point out a regulation that you take offense with. And how that has any effect on you if the regulation is removed.

Quetzal · Mar 27, 2017

tytlyf said:
That's the problem with republicans, they aren't specific on what regulations.

Which republicans? All of them?

tytlyf said:
They don't point out which regulations they don't like. They basically want all regulations eliminated.

I am trying to get you to address specifics. Here is my point, if you want to move the discussion forward with the "republicans" and have a decent discourse back and forth, you have to be willing to put in the leg work a bit. Bring up specific regulations that you think are helpful in hopes that they might agree and see it as helpful, too! For example, one regulation is that a health insurance plan that includes children must include oral and vision care for the dependent. I find that to be a very helpful regulation because I think it would be harmful if someone couldn't take their kids to the dentist because they couldn't afford it.

Underhill · Mar 27, 2017

tytlyf said:
Thankfully, the ACA is here to stay. Republicans don't like it because it hurts profits. The middle class has taken a victory against these greedy corporations. Good job everyone, that includes republicans who realized they don't want their healthcare taken away.

House GOP Leaders Pull Paul Ryan's Obamacare 2.0 Bill Off Floor Again - Breitbart

No, I don't think it is. The Republicans plan to make sure it fails miserably. So of course it will. Spending cuts alone could cripple the plan. Then they will attempt to blame democrats for it's inevitable failure.

Underhill · Mar 27, 2017

Quetzal said:
Which republicans? All of them?

I am trying to get you to address specifics. Here is my point, if you want to move the discussion forward with the "republicans" and have a decent discourse back and forth, you have to be willing to put in the leg work a bit. Bring up specific regulations that you think are helpful in hopes that they might agree and see it as helpful, too! For example, one regulation is that a health insurance plan that includes children must include oral and vision care for the dependent. I find that to be a very helpful regulation because I think it would be harmful if someone couldn't take their kids to the dentist because they couldn't afford it.

I think you are missing his point. He has no problem with regulations. Republicans do. So any discussion about specific regulations has to start with republicans addressing exactly which regulations they hate so much.

With Obamacare it has always been the case that when polling republicans about specific regulations most people like them. But when you ask them in general about Obamacare, or regulations in general, they complain.

Quetzal · Mar 27, 2017

Underhill said:
I think you are missing his point. He has no problem with regulations. Republicans do. So any discussion about specific regulations has to start with republicans addressing exactly which regulations they hate so much.

Gotcha, that's fair. I am just brining up another way to address the topic if they don't/can't name specifics. I think we are all on the same page though.

Quetzal · Mar 27, 2017

Underhill said:
No, I don't think it is. The Republicans plan to make sure it fails miserably.

This is what I am worried about. Now, they are going to cut certain parts of it away through any means and watch it collapse. It is like knocking out two supporting pillars and then blaming the architect it failed.

Underhill · Mar 27, 2017

Quetzal said:
This is what I am worried about. Now, they are going to cut certain parts of it away through any means and watch it collapse. It is like knocking out two supporting pillars and then blaming the architect it failed.

Yep, that is what is coming. Of course it is so blatantly transparent I am hoping only the die hard Trumpites will fall for it.

Quetzal · Mar 27, 2017

Underhill said:
Yep, that is what is coming. Of course it is so blatantly transparent I am hoping only the die hard Trumpites will fall for it.

If an individual refuses to hold the current administration accountable with what we have seen so far, I believe they will continue to do so throughout.

The middle class won today

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Being

Not Religious

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Not Religious

Certified People sTabber

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Not Religious

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Not Religious

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Forum Relic

Not Religious

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.

Well-Known Member

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.