Chuck Schumer Turned Down Offer From Trump About ACA Repeal

Page 2 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Oct 2017, 3:59 am

auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Oct 2017, 4:06 am

auntblabby wrote:
to give the lie to people saying ALL ACA recipients had to pay "285/month $10k deductible 50% coverage"-


That's what my aunt's employer provided insurance is, I'm not f*****g lying to you. She's in a service industry that employs millions. Go get a full time job in the service industry and you'll see what I mean. And add being a single parent to that. Go look at some employer provided healthcare plans for blue collar low end pay scale workers are offered. Or go out and ask a few about their healthcare plan. Go get a dose of raw reality regarding the matter.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 97,243
Location: the island of defective toy santas

16 Oct 2017, 4:45 am

EzraS wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.

I know people who are on the Washington state health exchange who were minimum wage workers [which is most of the working class btw] who do indeed pay about what I paid and got similar group death [now Kaiser Permanente death] bronze plans. the employer provided health plans are NOT a part of the state health care exchange UNLESS their employer defers [does not provide an employer group plan]. the WSHP is for people lacking an insurance employer group provider. employers providing lousy health plans on their own is nothing new, it happened well before ACA.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,786
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Oct 2017, 5:12 am

EzraS wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.


Like I said, everyone should be covered for everything. It's called single payer. Despite it's failings, it's still a helluva lot better than what we have now, or what we had before the ACA.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Oct 2017, 5:14 am

auntblabby wrote:
EzraS wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.

I know people who are on the Washington state health exchange who were minimum wage workers [which is most of the working class btw] who do indeed pay about what I paid and got similar group death [now Kaiser Permanente death] bronze plans. the employer provided health plans are NOT a part of the state health care exchange UNLESS their employer defers [does not provide an employer group plan]. the WSHP is for people lacking an insurance employer group provider. employers providing lousy health plans on their own is nothing new, it happened well before ACA.


My aunt's service industry provided a great healthcare plan going back 20 years prior to the ACA. She voted for Trump in hopes of restoring it to some degree. Whether she goes with her employer's plan or the healthcare.gov plan, it's about the same in premiums, deductable and coverage. She doesn't qualify for anything else because she makes more than the base poverty line. Maybe you think 25-30k a year is huge bucks, but it's not these days.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

16 Oct 2017, 5:20 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.


Like I said, everyone should be covered for everything. It's called single payer. Despite it's failings, it's still a helluva lot better than what we have now, or what we had before the ACA.


No argument there. People who can't aford should have it and others shouldn't have to pay so much a month for something that doesn't help them unless it's a catastrophic situation.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,786
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Oct 2017, 6:20 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
So, Trump asks Democrats to work on better health care, and they turn him down.


Who says what Trump envisions is in any way better? Millions of people will be tossed off the insurance rolls, and those remaining will have their benefits cut dramatically.


I take it you and AB don't have the $285 per month premium, $10,000 deductible, limited 50% coverage Obamacare most moderate to low income workers are stuck with.


I can't speak for Blabby, but starving artists such as myself don't have that sort of money lying around. If I did, it would be squandered on beer, and I'm hardly the only one. So much better to have the government provide something for all of us.

I don't believe that person actually believes that the bulk of ACA's beneficiaries pay that much after the subsidies. he is just being contentious. or he is misinformed by a longshot. or both.


Workers Do Not Get Subsidized. If someone makes more than absolute poverty and or their employer provides a healthcare plan, they do not qualify for a subsidy. Most employer provided healthcare plans for the average laborer are as I described. If you worked 40 hours a week at lets say Target, you would know exactly what I'm talking about.


Like I said, everyone should be covered for everything. It's called single payer. Despite it's failings, it's still a helluva lot better than what we have now, or what we had before the ACA.


No argument there. People who can't aford should have it and others shouldn't have to pay so much a month for something that doesn't help them unless it's a catastrophic situation.


Well, at least we agree on something.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer