The Senate tax bill eliminates the ACA individual mandate.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by garhkal

That MIGHT be true Flight. BUT it should not have come by the govt DICTATING to them 'you WILL insure them via US FORCING everyone else to be insured, so you can spread the cost around.

Garhkal, your first sentence you agree with me and disagree with Hankering. The health insurance companies should not deny people with pre-existing conditions the chance to purchase health insurance in the individual market.

Let's take a look at your second sentence. The health insurance companies can offer the cheapest premium when the risk pool is balanced. If the risk pool is not balanced one of two things will happen, the price of the premium will spike or the health insurance company would simply go out of business. The health insurance company can't turn a profit on a negative risk pool. It's not mathematically possible.

The question for you is how will the health insurance companies get a balanced risk pool?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

I do believe that other people should subsidize the costs of abortions for people who make poor life choices.

Fixed that for ya, flighty. You're a socialist, flighty, with no compassion for those who were paying their own way until Odumbocare made it too expensive for them, flighty? Where's the "social justice" for those who were shafted by Odumbo, flighty?

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Fixed that for ya, flighty. You're a socialist, flighty, with no compassion for those who were paying their own way until Odumbocare made it too expensive for them, flighty? Where's the "social justice" for those who were shafted by Odumbo, flighty?

I am not a socialist Corpy. I have already answered that. I believe that people should pay for their own abortions. I would change that part of the ACA if I could.

Userid Garhkal agrees that with me that people with pre-existing conditions should be able to purchase health insurance in the individual market. Go read post #118.

You did not answer the question about Bush43 and Medicare part D. Taxpayer money is used to help seniors pay for their prescriptions. Is Bush43 a socialist?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

I am not a socialist Corpy. I have already answered that. I believe that people should pay for their own abortions. I would change that part of the ACA if I could.

Userid Garhkal agrees that with me that people with pre-existing conditions should be able to purchase health insurance in the individual market. Go read post #118.

You did not answer the question about Bush43 and Medicare part D. Taxpayer money is used to help seniors pay for their prescriptions. Is Bush43 a socialist?

You can piss on your denials, flighty. You're an advocate for Odumbocare, flighty, and Odumbocare is a socialist program that redistributes individual earnings according to government dictates, flighty. You're a socialist, flighty, with no sympathy for those your socialist programs injure, flighty.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You can piss on your denials, flighty. You're an advocate for Odumbocare, flighty, and Odumbocare is a socialist program that redistributes individual earnings according to government dictates, flighty. You're a socialist, flighty, with no sympathy for those your socialist programs injure, flighty.

Flighty will be gone shortly just like Obamacare. Nice knowin ya Flighty.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Odumbocare is a socialist program that redistributes individual earnings according to government dictates, flighty.

Are the republican senators from Maine and Alaska socialists because they voted no against the skinny repeal? By doing so that kept the ACA the law of the land? LOL.

What do you think Medicare Part D does? This was signed into law by your hero Bush43. You will not answer the question is Bush43 a socialist? What's the problem Corpy is your computer keyboard stuck when it comes this question. Or do you get a brain freeze? LOL.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Are the republican senators from Maine and Alaska socialists because they voted no against the skinny repeal? By doing so that kept the ACA the law of the land? LOL.

What do you think Medicare Part D does? This was signed into law by your hero Bush43. You will not answer the question is Bush43 a socialist? What's the problem Corpy is your computer keyboard stuck when it comes this question. Or do you get a brain freeze? LOL.

No Republicans voted for Odumbocare -- a socialist program you support, flighty. You're a friggin' socialist who is all about redistributing wealth, flighty.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

who is all about redistributing wealth, flighty.

Your hero Bush43 is a socialist for signing Medicare Part D into law. A bill that redistributes wealth to poor seniors that can't afford to pay for their prescriptions.

Republican Senators McCain from Arizona, Collins from Maine and the republican senator from Alaska voted no against the skinnky repeal of the ACA, that makes them socialist for keeping the ACA the law.

You are a MORON.

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

I do believe that people with pre-existing conditions should not be prevented from purchasing health insurance in the individual market. Prior to the ACA law being passed this was not the case.

Would you agree then, that they should pay more for their insurance, just cause they DO have pre-existing conditions? much like if i have 2 auto accidents on my driving record, MY car insurance is higher than others would be??

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Garhkal, your first sentence you agree with me and disagree with Hankering. The health insurance companies should not deny people with pre-existing conditions the chance to purchase health insurance in the individual market.

How did you get me saying you 'MIGHT BE RIGHT" as me agreeing with you. If anything it says i MIGHT be agreeing with you...

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Let's take a look at your second sentence. The health insurance companies can offer the cheapest premium when the risk pool is balanced. If the risk pool is not balanced one of two things will happen, the price of the premium will spike or the health insurance company would simply go out of business. The health insurance company can't turn a profit on a negative risk pool. It's not mathematically possible.

Lets compare it to auto insurance. I pay low cause i have a great driving record, am over 40 and don't drive a sports car. Someone else who's under 22, HAS an accident on his (or her) record pays more. THAT IS THE Difference. NOT everyone's premium should be the same.

Originally Posted by flghtr65

The question for you is how will the health insurance companies get a balanced risk pool?

They don't need to. just like with auto insurance.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Your hero Bush43 is a socialist for signing Medicare Part D into law. A bill that redistributes wealth to poor seniors that can't afford to pay for their prescriptions.

Republican Senators McCain from Arizona, Collins from Maine and the republican senator from Alaska voted no against the skinnky repeal of the ACA, that makes them socialist for keeping the ACA the law.

You are a MORON.

Bush43 didn't fuck-up healthcare for millions of other citizens, you disingenuous, socialist jackass.

[royamcr]

The problem is the ACA wasn't given time to achieve balance. It takes time, several years. It was given maybe a year or two before Repubtards started to take shots at it to tear it down. One of the biggest mistakes was to not have the full individual mandate penalty in effect from day 1. It was phased in, the first year it wasn't a lot, so people just said fuck it I'll pay the penalty, 2 year it was a little more but people still said fuck it and pay the penalty. Then when it got to $750 or so people started to think heck if I'm paying that much I might was well have insurance.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Of course, I'm NOT WRONG! The data proves it!

If there were a "balanced risk pool" then the taxpayers would not have had to supplement premiums and supplement carriers for losses!

One thing you anti-Trumpers haven't figured out is:

ACA IS A FAILURE! IT FAILED BECAUSE OF STUPID LOGIC!

You are basking in it today! Drunk with the "snake oil" you bought.

The old saying: "The proof is in the pudding"!

Fines and Penalties are set to "entice" people into doing the "right/legal thing" and they are set high enough to make it "worthwhile" to do that which it was designed to entice done!

So, you must decide: Were you wrong or were you wrong?

You pick! (I already did when I saw the "penalty"!)

[bambino]

Originally Posted by royamcr

The problem is the ACA wasn't given time to achieve balance. It takes time, several years. It was given maybe a year or two before Repubtards started to take shots at it to tear it down. One of the biggest mistakes was to not have the full individual mandate penalty in effect from day 1. It was phased in, the first year it wasn't a lot, so people just said fuck it I'll pay the penalty, 2 year it was a little more but people still said fuck it and pay the penalty. Then when it got to $750 or so people started to think heck if I'm paying that much I might was well have insurance.

Yeah, when you mentioned PENALTY you lost all credibility. People were PENALIZED not to buy this horseshit. Go to Russia or IRAN. They PENALIZE there people. This is the home of the brave and FREE.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by royamcr

The problem is the ACA wasn't given time to achieve balance. It takes time, several years. It was given maybe a year or two before Repubtards started to take shots at it to tear it down. One of the biggest mistakes was to not have the full individual mandate penalty in effect from day 1. It was phased in, the first year it wasn't a lot, so people just said fuck it I'll pay the penalty, 2 year it was a little more but people still said fuck it and pay the penalty. Then when it got to $750 or so people started to think heck if I'm paying that much I might was well have insurance.

The individual mandate will be gone next enrollment period. People with pre-existing conditons that have high incomes will continue the buy the health insurance. This adds more risk to the risk pool and the insurer will increase the premium price. The repubtards don't want the mandate, they would rather have higher premiums.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Bush43 didn't

Bush43 left 50 million citizens uninsured while he spent 2 trillion looking for WMD's in Iraq, you fucking Moron.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

socialist

Your hero Bush43 did wealth redistribution with Medicare Part D. Using your logic that makes Bush43 a socialist. Since you are Bush worshiper that would make you a socialist. You just caught with your own bullshit, fucking Moron.