I do not like executive orders

[Ame®icano]

This particular order relieves the abuse of the government's overreach into my healthcare.

What overreach? Can I ask how you believe insurance in general works. This EO seems to want to create 2 parallel markets. One cheaper one that includes healthy people and one that will become unfavorable to a significant segment of the population. A segment that will include a lot of grandpa's.

I am not going to relitigate the merits Obamacare again.

But i will say if Obamacare flops quicker as a result of this EO, good. That bill should have never become law.

Even if that's true,calling for health insurance to fail is cynical to say the least, considering the bottom line of that equation is human lives. And I don't ask you to re-litigate ACA, I'm asking you to make your point as to how this EO makes it better. A valid question since you started this OP because you like it. I gave you the basic problem. It is an EO designed to create 2 different markets, one cheap one and one expensive one for the age group you belong too. So make your case please?

Healthcare was call to fail the moment when government got involved in it. Even if ACA was constitutional, and in my opinion it wasn't, it was set to fail the moment it was passed in Congress. Along with Barry's EOs that followed it became even more overreaching. Trumps EOs eliminates some of the burden, but I'll rather see it gone completely.

There are plenty of countries were the government has actual control of large parts of the health care system. They all are cheaper and score better in most health indices.

There are plenty of countries that are ruled by elites and don't have our rights. I spent years all over Europe and I wouldn't take their healthcare, or their "freedoms" over ours.

In regarding the cost, many (not all) of those countries you're talking about are also much cheaper, and lower standard of living, generally. Although it appears that healthcare is cheaper, when you take the count the tax burden on the people, quality of care, rationing and waiting, they turn out to be more expensive.

 

[iceberg]

Obama felt that way too.

Not sure how - he got elected twice. I'm not saying the GOP just wants to be difficult, but....

Obamas EOs were largely a way around congress. The left loved the IN YOUR FACE route but now hate trump doing it.

I hate any president doing that.

If it helps the US, I don't care who does it.
If it makes us stronger and more functional. Please EO away

great. so the president can now create law AND enforce it.

you don't see that as a bad idea and counter to the entire "separation of powers"?

I don't think a lot of people understand the risk. We are giving them more control with each administration.

yep.

obama does it, but you like obama and want what you want NOW. so who cares if he finds a way around congress.

WAIT - TRUMP IS DOING IT?? FOUL!!!

doesn't work like that. once you set a precedence it's hard as hell to put that back in the bottle.

 

[Ame®icano]

IMO, it didn't do good. It's easy to claim that you insured 20 million when you force them with penalties to do it. What about people that lost insurance? What about millions that were still uninsured? What about increased premiums that were promised to be lowered? What about the overall cost that was set to be double than projected?

There were fixes, mostly money shortage, necessary to keep it afloat. Without those fixes it would implode and be dead already.

Not a single word in the ACA has been modified.

EOs don't count?

 

[Ame®icano]

On this issue, yes, Barry did both. First he shoved it down our throat, than he used EO to make it even harder to swallow.
.

Obama did big legislation. That's why you keep bitching about what he accomplished.

Meanwhile, you don't complain about Trumps inability to get anything through a republican controlled congress.

True, it was big legislation, unnecessary big, complicated and expensive.

I am bitching that accomplished almost nothing from promised, but for most, I'm bitching about the way it was forced to us, about lies used to pass, and constitutionality.

Untrue, I am bitching about Republican Congress that is not keeping promises and not supporting, or rather obstructing the President because they don't have him in their pockets. I hope the problem will be at least partially solved with midterm elections.

 

[Ame®icano]

I bet you don't mean that. Since the biggest offender ever is Trump. Hundreds of campaign promises, and virtually zero results.

He actually kept every promise that he could keep on his own. .

That's like being proud of having all the sex you can, on your own.

Yeah, if we're talking about group sex.

 

[jc456]

All sides = the GOP

It's hard to get anything done for the working class when politicians, government, and big business are against you

Trump can't even get repeal of obamacare through congress.
And he has a republican majority in both houses.
And Trump said it would be easy
And the house did it 60+ times under Obama

you mean congress can't get a repeal of obummerfail even though for seven years they claimed they did. You are confused who writes laws.

 

[Ame®icano]

IMO, it didn't do good. It's easy to claim that you insured 20 million when you force them with penalties to do it. What about people that lost insurance? What about millions that were still uninsured? What about increased premiums that were promised to be lowered? What about the overall cost that was set to be double than projected?

There were fixes, mostly money shortage, necessary to keep it afloat. Without those fixes it would implode and be dead already.

Not a single word in the ACA has been modified.

the aca is a law, its the job of congress to amend laws to bake them better.. apparently 8 years isnt long enough to begin that process.

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn ...

Or to kill it if it doesn't deliver the expected. What do you think which one it is?

 

[jc456]

I love executive orders, and the more trump uses, the better, since all sides seem hell bent on stopping anything he wants to do.. right or wrong...

Obama felt that way too.

Not sure how - he got elected twice. I'm not saying the GOP just wants to be difficult, but....

Obamas EOs were largely a way around congress. The left loved the IN YOUR FACE route but now hate trump doing it.

I hate any president doing that.

I hate congress people who refuse to do the job the people asked them to do.

Unfortunately, your vote is a waste. All men/women are equally corrupt and willing to be bribed and play the illicit game

oh don't worry, I know all of this and why my vote went to Trump. Nobody bought him off.

 

[postman]

There were fixes, mostly money shortage, necessary to keep it afloat. Without those fixes it would implode and be dead already.

Not a single word in the ACA has been modified.

the aca is a law, its the job of congress to amend laws to bake them better.. apparently 8 years isnt long enough to begin that process.

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn ...

That's the point. Very few if any programs have gone unchanged for that long. The GOP goal was to repeal only, and block any attempts to fix it.

 

[forkup]

What overreach? Can I ask how you believe insurance in general works. This EO seems to want to create 2 parallel markets. One cheaper one that includes healthy people and one that will become unfavorable to a significant segment of the population. A segment that will include a lot of grandpa's.

I am not going to relitigate the merits Obamacare again.

But i will say if Obamacare flops quicker as a result of this EO, good. That bill should have never become law.

Even if that's true,calling for health insurance to fail is cynical to say the least, considering the bottom line of that equation is human lives. And I don't ask you to re-litigate ACA, I'm asking you to make your point as to how this EO makes it better. A valid question since you started this OP because you like it. I gave you the basic problem. It is an EO designed to create 2 different markets, one cheap one and one expensive one for the age group you belong too. So make your case please?

Healthcare was call to fail the moment when government got involved in it. Even if ACA was constitutional, and in my opinion it wasn't, it was set to fail the moment it was passed in Congress. Along with Barry's EOs that followed it became even more overreaching. Trumps EOs eliminates some of the burden, but I'll rather see it gone completely.

There are plenty of countries were the government has actual control of large parts of the health care system. They all are cheaper and score better in most health indices.

There are plenty of countries that are ruled by elites and don't have our rights. I spent years all over Europe and I wouldn't take their healthcare, or their "freedoms" over ours.

In regarding the cost, many (not all) of those countries you're talking about are also much cheaper, and lower standard of living, generally. Although it appears that healthcare is cheaper, when you take the count the tax burden on the people, quality of care, rationing and waiting, they turn out to be more expensive.

Lol since I'm European with an American wife and I can say at least as far as my country goes. BALONEY. Yes I pay way higher taxes and in actual costs dollar for dollar we are twice as cheap. If you use the in my view more honest approach of looking at it as a percentage of GDP we are still about 35 percent cheaper.Health expenditure, total (% of GDP) | Data
List of countries by total health expenditure per capita - Wikipedia
These are stats, taxes plus out of pocket cost. And I'm perfectly willing to compare service too btw, considering the fact that I've got experiences in both systems.Health Care Index by Country 2017 Mid-Year

 

[debbiedowner]

The measure of an executive order is what it actually does, not what the President claims it will do.

Since the executive order itself has not been published, it is impossible to judge whether it is "good" or not.

I wish someone would have told the bumbling boob head HRA's have been allowed all year.

 

[postman]

great. so the president can now create law AND enforce it.

you don't see that as a bad idea and counter to the entire "separation of powers"?

The president can create regulation AND enforce it.

 

[postman]

Not a single word in the ACA has been modified.

EOs don't count?

Did they change the wording in the ACA?

 

[iceberg]

great. so the president can now create law AND enforce it.

you don't see that as a bad idea and counter to the entire "separation of powers"?

The president can create regulation AND enforce it.

but only if you like the president, i suppose. and regulations are getting a fine line drawn into law now aren't they?

 

[debbiedowner]

This EO seems to want to create 2 parallel markets. One cheaper one that includes healthy people and one that will become unfavorable to a significant segment of the population. A segment that will include a lot of grampa's.

That's the spin being put out by the liberal media.

Not just healthy people can join these associations. That's a total crock of shit lie by the media.

Anyone who is eligible to join will join. Just like they join credit unions regardless of their credit health.

This allows people to join associations which will have greater collective bargaining power with insurance companies than an individual on their own has. It will greatly reduce insurance costs for millions of Americans. Anyone who paints it any other way is an asshole.

It will reduce claims paid by insurance companies too. Not to mention the benefits.

 

[postman]

The president can create regulation AND enforce it.

but only if you like the president, i suppose. and regulations are getting a fine line drawn into law now aren't they?

No, any president can create regulation, and then be charged with enforcing the regulations he wrote. And it's no little thing either, just look at how many thousands of pages are added to the CFR every year.

 

[debbiedowner]

The measure of an executive order is what it actually does, not what the President claims it will do.

Since the executive order itself has not been published, it is impossible to judge whether it is "good" or not.

Impossible? Hardly. Companies will rush to serve this new market. It will help usher in the collapse of Obamacare at the same time.

What is this "new market" you refer to?

Group plans that no longer have the attached minimum mandates of Obamacare. Plans that can be tailored to your individual needs/wants.

There is no help for you if you think any insurance/association plan is going to tailor a plan for your individual needs. Just ain't gonna happen.

 

[postman]

That's the spin being put out by the liberal media.

Not just healthy people can join these associations. That's a total crock of shit lie by the media..

It's true, anybody can join an association that doesn't cover even 1/3rd of their medical expenses because of policy limits, or preexisting conditions.

 

[iceberg]

The president can create regulation AND enforce it.

but only if you like the president, i suppose. and regulations are getting a fine line drawn into law now aren't they?

No, any president can create regulation, and then be charged with enforcing the regulations he wrote. And it's no little thing either, just look at how many thousands of pages are added to the CFR every year.

yes, they can but again - we're far beyond "regulation" and we're well into "laws" and again - once you cross the line and don't put an end to it, people on either side will only push it further than the last president did for no other reason than no one is trying to control this and keep it within the confines of the purpose and office.

 

[debbiedowner]

Car insurance has been going down while the cost of cars has been rising.

Not where i live. Car insurance keeps rising but then, i live in a sanctuary state.

I don't live in a Sanctuary state but mine goes up every 6 months and has for 4 years. A new surcharge for this and that every damn time.