And all of this is independent of the ACA and the marketplace. If you're applying for this stuff, you can't afford the out of pocket costs anyway. That means if you get your plan's premium subsidized already because you're disabled and cannot work, you can't afford the out of pocket costs from the plans.
So the appeal to emotion fallacy about preserving the ACA because of disabled people is invalid. It amounts to what I said it was, "...fear-mongering that Democrats have been propagandizing to the world about the ACA."
That applies only to disabled people who meet the SSDI requirements to begin with.
It's also not a "but disabled people!" strictly for me, it's about people getting shafted by insurance companies like it was before the ACA. If you want to tear down the ACA, cool, just have a better plan already penned out and set to go.
That sucks one of the problems for consumers of regular health insurance is that many people never take the time to understand it and when those limited plans comes along it's even worse with less understanding.
I say make healthcare a right, cuz Dems have shown they won't ever come after rights...what could go wrong?
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Last I read it's still in the U.S. Court of Appeals. If it goes favorably for Trump there, we could see the ACA either outright repealed or further chipped away to uselessness.
Read the story I just posted, insurance companies are banking in at people's expenses due to this.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Last edited by Surtur on Sep 26th, 2019 at 10:20 AM
In a filing with the U.S. Supreme Court, the Trump administration has reaffirmed its position that the Affordable Care Act in its entirety is illegal because Congress eliminated the individual tax penalty for failing to purchase medical insurance.
Solicitor General Noel Francisco, the government's chief advocate before the Supreme Court, said in a brief that the other provisions of Obamacare are impossible to separate from the individual mandate and that "it necessarily follows that the rest of the ACA must also fall." -snip
The Trump admin has not given details on what health care place would replace the ACA if it is stuck down, Alex Azar the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services said there would likely be no details given on the new plan until after the SC rules on the ACA.
There is no replacement. Republicans have had like a decade to come up with a viable alternative to pitch to people but there isn’t one. Just basically to go back to how things were before Obamacare, thus giving people with preexisting conditions a death sentence or bankruptcy.
Still, seeing it in words makes me sad. If you want to combat racist, we need UHC. And it has been majority supported by the American people since 2014 and ONLY increasing, year over year.
It seems politically very stupid too. Because the ACA isn’t popular so it should be pretty easy for them to come up with a replacement idea that could garner support. I think republicans have actually made the ACA more popular with the strategy they’re using.
Obama should send them all thank you cards for their ineptitude.
Imagine the Republicans coming up with a UHC plan that is similar to Medicare for All but with copays (which MfA should be, not Bernie's retardedly expensive plan).
KMC Community Forums
Mar 26th, 2019 05:57 PM
