Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 504415)

But, but, but.... Identity politics!! All lives matter!!

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 504324)

Which party promises jobs will come back, if only we vote them in?

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 504326)

Actually, the major problem with the mandate right now is that it doesn't hurt enough. Which is one of the contributing reasons that the rates went up this enrollment period and some insurers left some markets. A lot of healthy people opted to take the minor hit than get health insurance.

Frankly, if I were to mess with it, I'd get rid of the "stay on your parents' insurance until 25" to get a hold of those young healthy lives for the ACA risk pools. Probably would see a drop in rates in a lot of markets if the penalties were incentive enough for the 20-24 year old set to buy insurance.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 504334)

On the one hand, Gen. Mattis seems like a competent, experienced individual Trump might actually listen to.

On the other hand, some civilian oversight is a good thing and it sounds like Mattis wants war with Iran.

Otherwise, remember when Hillary was going to be more war-like than Trump??

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 504357)

Okay, I think we've taken this conversation as far as we can. I appreciate the back-and-forth.

I will say this: It is absolutely infuriating that it is up to minorities to figure out the best way to point out racist shit they experience to fragile white people. White people do racist shit (whether it's intentionally racist or whether it is the more "polite" type of racism--whatever that means) that results in serious problems and minorities have to massage the message in such a way that white people don't feel like they're being accused of being racist for them to even listen. That shit is absolutely infuriating. Especially when we are all trying to figure out the best way to tackle the problems facing uneducated, ignorant, white people who live in areas of the country with dying industries. We need to understand them and cater to them and help them, while they point at blacks and Mexicans and Muslims and gays and accuse us of causing their problems.

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 504360)

I apologize. Please accept this as a peace offering.

http://cookdiary.net/wp-content/uplo...ches_14129.jpg

TM

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 504375)

And the fact of the matter is we do have an answer for these people: move.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 504418)

The question was how can a state law the limits the right to vote vary from state to state. The answer is that the constitution expressly allows it.

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 504419)

There is lots of other stuff in there that is very helpful - including provisions that are moving us from a service-based to outcome-based reimbursement scheme, which is the best bet for controlling care in the current system.

I'd have loved to have seen a public option, but having a public entity contracting wouldn't have significantly altered the price structure in health care. Public entities are already among the largest purchasers of healthcare in the US - why would adding another to the mix be hugely different? It might make some different, which is why I'd like it, but nothing radical.

The key way ACA planned to help the lower income seeking healthcare in particular was through subsidized insurance and an expansion of Medicaid. Of course, a lot of states have opted out of Medicaid expansion, to the disadvantage of their citizens, but there is a fair bit of subsidized insurance out there.

I won't pretend to have a lot of answers, but the reform I'd really like to see next would be to make the US part of a bigger market for drug approval and distribution - so we had, for example, a common drug market in the EU and US. Drug companies would have less hassle in approvals but we'd get the benefit of systems that have been much more successful at keeping drug prices down. I'd be hoping the larger market supported innovation, even if the approach took a lot of money out of the pharma pipeline.

Parts of TTIP might have set the stage for this, but with the TPP dead, we can be pretty certain that's going nowhere. And with Brexit we don't even know if EMA will continue to hold for the UK as well as EU.

Originally Posted by taxwonk (Post 504428)

I know a lot of people who qualified for subsidized plans. The subsidy is based on coverage at the Bronze Level. Coverage there is set like one would get for a HSA plan, without the income to fund the HSA. Why should someone bother paying even $75/mo. for a plan that doesn't pay any benefits until the insured has come $5700 out of pocket?

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 504429)

Healthcare is really expensive, and the ACA didn't solve that problem, which is more like a fact of life. Blaming the ACA for this is kinda like blaming transportation funding bills for the fact that we're not all flying around in personal hovercraft.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 504430)

Actually it's more like 80% of America had a Ford Pinto and you lot worried about getting the other 20% a tricycle, so now we all have just one roller skate.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 504435)

If that were actually true, that would be bad.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 504429)

Healthcare is really expensive, and the ACA didn't solve that problem, which is more like a fact of life. Blaming the ACA for this is kinda like blaming transportation funding bills for the fact that we're not all flying around in personal hovercraft.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 504430)

Actually it's more like 80% of America had a Ford Pinto and you lot worried about getting the other 20% a tricycle, so now we all have just one roller skate.