• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

WaPo:Trump suggests Republicans will let ACA market collapse, then rewrite health law

Dec 11, 2012
22,028
2
0
I do not believe the person who made the original argument was trolling. Why do you assume David H Wong was trolling with his post?



I'm really not understanding why I'm getting such heat, but nobody got mad when the original argument was made not even a month ago.

Oh, you're just a troll.

Meh. Thanks for the derailment though.
 

Lo-Volt

Member
Jul 4, 2005
7,460
0
0
Boston-Atlanta Metropolitan Axis
So if the ACA collapses and insurers leave the market, it may be years before those customers get affordable plans and renewed coverage. Tens of millions will be directly affected, for YEARS, and all of us might be indirectly affected by how disruptions to exchanges impact health systems, which will once again see more and more uninsured people flood into ERs and get expensive short-term care. Those patients will lose their lives, the quality of their lives, and their future prosperity as they sink into medically induced bankruptcies, never mind comas. And Donald Trump thinks we won’t blame him. I won’t even... fuck him and fuck this absurdist logic.

How could the Republicans convince anyone to come to the table after this utter disaster? They tried to force stealth bills through the houses even though hospital groups, insurance lobbyists, rural health systems and the AARP all denounced the attempt. There were no hearings of significance, no buy-in, and no extended campaign of public explanation. There wasn’t jack, nor shit. Why in the goddamn hell would any of these groups want to participate in a renewed effort as the government sabotages the national health system? Donald Trump is openly stiffing participant companies from subsidies to operate in the exchanges - would you trust that man? Would you trust Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell to do business with you, or the president? No. It’s easier for companies to fuck them up in court to be frank, and lobbyists and public pressure groups would go to town on these fuckers regardless. And why not just attack them for this? The AARP and disabled advocates can read polls better than Donald Trump; they know that healthcare is turning into a universal polling disaster for Republicans, even in safe seats. Time to ride on these idiots.
 

13ruce

Banned
Aug 29, 2016
8,330
12
0
Netherlands
When nearly all other first world countries already have proper healthcare and the USA not.... and now it's president wants to ruin the healthcare that finally is there intentionally the fuck? Maybe improve it instead of destroying it all together?

Seriously dude is a straight up a clown and a huge dumb af idiot wich should have never been a world/nation leader. Fuck him seriously i would not mind if something happens to him he and his GOP mates are ruining a country that was finally improving the last decade or so. All improvements made are gonna be ruined by him no doubt setting America back yet again for several decades progress wise it's hilarious and very sad at the same time.

I hope his changes does not ruin too much peoples lives but sadly he does not care about low and middle class people probably.

And i don't even live in America myself but it's very sad to see such a bastard ruining a big country to the ground. By the way mad respect for americans who are against trump and the current gop huge props to you guys and gals!
Hopefully he will not have a second term:/
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
Here, I'll isolate the relevant bits.



This argument is sourced.

We need to start killing poor people ASAP (or at least push legislation that makes them more likely to die), otherwise more will die in the future. Like deer, or some other nonhuman animal.

It sounds pretty unempathetic, but we need to face reality. Trump and the Republicans are misunderstood. They are trying to save humanity. Like hunters when they cull deer populations so that they don't overbreed and starve the whole species out.
I have to assume this is a hack or something because I don't think I had seen a pro-trump post on this account before today and now we're straight in to killing the poor.

Or it was just a shitty trolling attempt to try and make David look especially bad.
 

Z_Y

Member
Nov 15, 2006
3,296
7
1,045
Here, I'll isolate the relevant bits.



This argument is sourced.

We need to start killing poor people ASAP (or at least push legislation that makes them more likely to die), otherwise more will die in the future. Like deer, or some other nonhuman animal.

It sounds pretty unempathetic, but we need to face reality. Trump and the Republicans are misunderstood. They are trying to save humanity. Like hunters when they cull deer populations so that they don't overbreed and starve the whole species out.


This is amazing.

Yes, we are exactly like deer. All the billionaire deer just live in secluded areas where we don't see them and drive invisible Aston-Martins.
 

digdug2k

Member
Apr 11, 2014
1,940
0
0
"Sourced" need not be in quotes. I've linked the post with the original argument.
The major parts of the post "Costs HAVE to come down at some point - you can't just keep printing money" aren't actually sourced. Big parts of it are just him saying "Republicans think..." i.e. "They're saying we either make those cuts now, or else the system will collapse and then millions truly will die." or "We're going to turn into Greece!"

One of his sources is actually an article about how Republicans don't actually cut spending. Like, the graph is a graph over the last 100 years that just shows a steady increase in spending on welfare programs for the last 100 years, despite Republicans holding power over large portions of that time.

That article highlights the sillyness of the whole argument. Republicans don't actually believe in balanced budgets or cutting spending. Its a talking point they've latched onto because it resonates with some people in the US ("I have to live in a budget, why doesn't the government?"), but those same people aren't actually willing to cut welfare programs (i.e. Social Security/Medicaid basically make up the entirety of that graph, and despite the argument they're trying to make here, the graph shows the ACA wasn't a significant contributor to the medicaid spending) when push comes to shove, because they depend on them too.

And at the same time, the GOP likes to make these grand "Democrats love spending and deficits" arguments, that are bullshit. Democrats would be happy to cut wasteful shit out of spending alongside them. Fucking overjoyed to see it done if they're actually wasteful. The party has basically just choked on so much of its own rhetoric at this point, they don't live in reality. They actually believe that Obama was trying to turn the USA into communist Russia. Like, many many people seriously still literally believe this today, and believe that Hillary would have continued it. Thats fucking nuts, right?

If enough of them ever manage to come back to reality, maybe everyone can finally sit down and try to find real solutions to tough problems that are better than these ones that are (lets face reality here) "lets just kill all the black people".
 

Gallbaro

Banned
May 13, 2008
9,232
2
0
The major parts of the post "Costs HAVE to come down at some point - you can't just keep printing money" aren't actually sourced. Big parts of it are just him saying "Republicans think..." i.e. "They're saying we either make those cuts now, or else the system will collapse and then millions truly will die." or "We're going to turn into Greece!"

One of his sources is actually an article about how Republicans don't actually cut spending. Like, the graph is a graph over the last 100 years that just shows a steady increase in spending on welfare programs for the last 100 years, despite Republicans holding power over large portions of that time.

That article highlights the sillyness of the whole argument. Republicans don't actually believe in balanced budgets or cutting spending. Its a talking point they've latched onto because it resonates with some people in the US ("I have to live in a budget, why doesn't the government?"), but those same people aren't actually willing to cut welfare programs (i.e. Social Security/Medicaid basically make up the entirety of that graph, and despite the argument they're trying to make here, the graph shows the ACA wasn't a significant contributor to the medicaid spending) when push comes to shove, because they depend on them too.

And at the same time, the GOP likes to make these grand "Democrats love spending and deficits" arguments, that are bullshit. Democrats would be happy to cut wasteful shit out of spending alongside them. Fucking overjoyed to see it done if they're actually wasteful. The party has basically just choked on so much of its own rhetoric at this point, they don't live in reality. They actually believe that Obama was trying to turn the USA into communist Russia. Like, many many people seriously still literally believe this today, and believe that Hillary would have continued it. Thats fucking nuts, right?

If enough of them ever manage to come back to reality, maybe everyone can finally sit down and try to find real solutions to tough problems that are better than these ones that are (lets face reality here) "lets just kill all the black people".

Dems are a party of stakeholders just as the GOP is. Democratic stakeholders are driven just as much as anyone else by perceived economic self interest and there are plenty of Democratic stakeholders that do not want to see costs come down.

To say they want costs to come down is not really how they acted during the original Obamacare debate.

Edit: I am not saying that the GOP had a large body of rational stakeholders, but they still vote in their perceived self interest.
 

Mackenzie 92

Member
Apr 11, 2012
6,769
2
595
What can Trump and co really do except not paying the subsidies? That alone will not collapse ACA and may even inadvertently strengthen it. The cost-sharing subsidies only apply to discounts within silver plans. Those same silver plans are what the government bases the ACA tax credits on. By not paying the subsidies, the silver plans will increase by about 20%. That means people will get more tax credits to instantly buy a plan on the market (costing the government about 2.5 billion more). And they could probably get a Bronze plan for basically free after the increased credit or a Gold plan for little more than the price of a Silver plan. Which means people who have opted out may go ahead and opt in at the reduced cost.

Of course that's assuming insurers only raise rates on the silver plans. But Kaiser has already said they plan as much in case the subsidies payments end.