| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9604
Back to top |
 Posted: 05/04/17 11:49 pm ::: American Health Care Act |
Reply  |
|
The American Health Care Act: the Obamacare repeal bill the House just passed, explained
| Quote: |
| The bill would cut taxes for the wealthy. Obamacare included tax increases that hit wealthy Americans hardest in order to pay for its coverage expansion. The AHCA would get rid of those taxes — tax cuts that add up to $883 billion, the majority of them benefiting the wealthy, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Obamacare was one of the biggest redistributions of wealth from the rich to the poor; the AHCA would reverse that. |
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 12:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Yeah, the bill is a steaming pile of horse shit.
It was terrible the first time around, then they added amendments to make it even worse. This should make clear the GOP's absolute contempt for poor people, yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21925
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 1:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| This should make clear the GOP's absolute contempt for poor people, yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
It's so strange to see people cheering him on as he screws them over!
He mentions to our Prime Minister that our health care system is better than his, and then proceeds to make his less like ours. Bizarre.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
Last edited by Luuuc on 05/05/17 1:06 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 1:05 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I don't think anyone knows what's in the bill. The media coverage is very superficial. In any event, the bill will substantially change in the Senate, after which no one will really know what's in it for years if it passes.
THIS SITE purports to list all the taxes that the bill repeals. I'm not sure which ones would constitute tax breaks for the wealthy.
| Quote: |
The American Health Care Act (HR 1628) passed by the House today reduces taxes on the American people by over $1 trillion. The bill abolishes the following taxes imposed by Obama and the Democrat party in 2010 as part of Obamacare:
-Abolishes the Obamacare Individual Mandate Tax which hits 8 million Americans each year.
-Abolishes the Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax. Together with repeal of the Individual Mandate Tax repeal this is a $270 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes Obamacare’s Medicine Cabinet Tax which hits 20 million Americans with Health Savings Accounts and 30 million Americans with Flexible Spending Accounts. This is a $6 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes Obamacare’s Flexible Spending Account tax on 30 million Americans. This is a $20 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes Obamacare’s Chronic Care Tax on 10 million Americans with high out of pocket medical expenses. This is a $126 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes Obamacare’s HSA withdrawal tax. This is a $100 million tax cut.
-Abolishes Obamacare’s 10% excise tax on small businesses with indoor tanning services. This is a $600 million tax cut.
-Abolishes the Obamacare health insurance tax. This is a $145 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes the Obamacare 3.8% surtax on investment income. This is a $172 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes the Obamacare medical device tax. This is a $20 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on prescription medicine. This is a $28 billion tax cut.
-Abolishes the Obamacare tax on retiree prescription drug coverage. This is a $2 billion tax cut. |
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 1:44 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
I'm not sure which ones would constitute tax breaks for the wealthy. |
You mean besides the removal of the 3.8% tax applied to capital gains, dividend, and interest income for families with $250,000 or more in income ($125,000 for singles)?
Or the 0.9 percent Medicare surtax on wage income in excess of $250,000 a year?
Add in that this bill gives tax credits based upon age rather than income, and more of the pie is being given to those with plenty instead of those in need.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9604
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 5:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| The Senate is working on their own bill. As a writer just put it, they are in tougher races than most of the house, so they want a bill more amenable to the general public. Don't know how that works though as to whether the House would have to approve any bill passed by the Senate.
|
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8857
Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 7:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| I don't think anyone knows what's in the bill. |
Ryan did just what he blamed the Dems for with Obamacare: ramming it through without a CBO score, no one had time to read it, didn't sell it to their constituents. blah, blah, blah. don't believe it? roll the video tape.
_________________
i'll always bleed Storm green.
|
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8857
Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 7:46 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| The Senate is working on their own bill. As a writer just put it, they are in tougher races than most of the house, so they want a bill more amenable to the general public. Don't know how that works though as to whether the House would have to approve any bill passed by the Senate. |
Ryan just wanted to get it off his plate and give Trump a victory. but its all empty, McConnell knows this and has said he has no timeline on when the Senate will take up ACHA bill. so, yeah. good onya, Paul.
and seriously, BUD LIGHT? who the hell drinks Bud Light to 'celebrate'?
_________________
i'll always bleed Storm green.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 9:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| Don't know how that works though as to whether the House would have to approve any bill passed by the Senate. |
Huh? How do you think it works?
Of course they have to eventually pass a single identical bill.
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 9:20 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
Yeah, the bill is a steaming pile of horse shit.
It was terrible the first time around, then they added amendments to make it even worse. This should make clear the GOP's absolute contempt for poor people, yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
It's an interesting aspect of human behavior in general, and middle-lower economic class white Americans in particular, isn't it?
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19752
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 9:31 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people?
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19752
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 9:34 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| cthskzfn wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
Yeah, the bill is a steaming pile of horse shit.
It was terrible the first time around, then they added amendments to make it even worse. This should make clear the GOP's absolute contempt for poor people, yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
It's an interesting aspect of human behavior in general, and middle-lower economic class white Americans in particular, isn't it? |
Republican ideology still allows them to feel higher on the totem poll than others who are being treated worse. They don't understand how policy works, but they understand their pride.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 10:02 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| cthskzfn wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
Yeah, the bill is a steaming pile of horse shit.
It was terrible the first time around, then they added amendments to make it even worse. This should make clear the GOP's absolute contempt for poor people, yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
It's an interesting aspect of human behavior in general, and middle-lower economic class white Americans in particular, isn't it? |
Republican ideology still allows them to feel higher on the totem poll than others who are being treated worse. They don't understand how policy works, but they understand their pride. |
FUX NEWS:
Rich white people paying rich white people to teach middle/lower class white people to blame non-white people.
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 12:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people? |
Maybe you can point out the actual passage of the bill that says that.
It's a foolish piece of legislation, but throwing phony sensationalist sound bites out there hardly advances the discussion.
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19752
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/05/17 11:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people? |
Maybe you can point out the actual passage of the bill that says that.
It's a foolish piece of legislation, but throwing phony sensationalist sound bites out there hardly advances the discussion. |
You're a big boy, you can figure out how it works.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9604
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 1:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
Poor brown and black voters voted for Clinton and against Sanders who was going to do more for them. That is, they voted against their own interests and for the candidate the party wanted them to.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9604
Back to top |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 1:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people? |
Maybe you can point out the actual passage of the bill that says that.
It's a foolish piece of legislation, but throwing phony sensationalist sound bites out there hardly advances the discussion. |
You're a big boy, you can figure out how it works. |
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/05/blog-posting/headlines-say-gop-bill-makes-sexual-assault-pre-ex/
This bill is such a dumpster fire that there are plenty of places to attack it. There really is no need to reach for the sensational half-truths (or in this case sensational mostly-falses). I mean, it is so bad that there are things that are 100% true that are just as insane.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 1:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
Poor brown and black voters voted for Clinton and against Sanders who was going to do more for them. That is, they voted against their own interests and for the candidate the party wanted them to. |
While I would tend to agree, it really isn't a good comparison. The difference between those two were mostly that of degree. It was not that one of them would be actively working against their interests.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9604
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 7:38 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| yet poor white voters will continue to vote against their interests. |
Poor brown and black voters voted for Clinton and against Sanders who was going to do more for them. That is, they voted against their own interests and for the candidate the party wanted them to. |
While I would tend to agree, it really isn't a good comparison. The difference between those two were mostly that of degree. It was not that one of them would be actively working against their interests. |
Sanders and Clinton were both going to work against the interests of the American worker/poor by working hard on behalf of illegal workers. Illegal immigration really should be a liberal issue - that is they should fight it, while the conservatives support it. The elite conservatives support it, because of the damage it does to wage rates and working conditions and labor force supply/demand. Elite neo-liberals also support it for the labor force destruction, and liberals support it , I'm guessing, on the basis that they are helping the poor - of other countries - and they either rationalize that it doesn't hurt the American poor, or that the foreign poor need the help more. And there is probably some white guilt factored in as well - I don't think they would support large scale illegal immigration and illegal employment of people from England.
But, while Sanders was going to fight to bring jobs back, Clinton again planned to work against the interests of workers by supporting the status quo (like all of Congress) of job export. (With her stuck between the only two "bring jobs back candidates" in Washington, we got new rhetoric from supporters that says "can't bring any jobs back because they would ALL be automated".)
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 9:30 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Blacks, as did most voters, voted for Clinton. There is little equivalence to that and non-wealthy whites' support of Chump/Republicans.
Clinton eventually switched on trade policies, which were, btw, Republican-initiated and supported legislation. The majority of Republicans supported GATT, NAFTA while the majority of Democrats didn't.
The Democratic Party platform is better for the "white working-class man" than is the Republican Party platform. Democratic policies are better, too.
Republicans employ racist, xenophobic, and fear-based propaganda as well as rigged voting districts and voter suppression to win elections.
Their biggest propaganda vehicle is FOX NEWS, along w/ the rest of the corporate, elite-controlled media, including right-wing hate radio.
I understand your issue with illegal immigration and consequent flooding of the workforce which, in simple terms, lessens the value of each worker.
Issues such as healthcare are more critical and immediate, imo. When the CBO scores this dog and pony show bill the House passed and the "white working-class man" sees how fucked it is, it will have less than the 17% approval rating of its predecessor, I predict.
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19752
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 9:49 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people? |
Maybe you can point out the actual passage of the bill that says that.
It's a foolish piece of legislation, but throwing phony sensationalist sound bites out there hardly advances the discussion. |
You're a big boy, you can figure out how it works. |
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/05/blog-posting/headlines-say-gop-bill-makes-sexual-assault-pre-ex/
This bill is such a dumpster fire that there are plenty of places to attack it. There really is no need to reach for the sensational half-truths (or in this case sensational mostly-falses). I mean, it is so bad that there are things that are 100% true that are just as insane. |
It's not sensational half truths.
Victims of rape who suffered from PTSD and other mental or physical health issues were denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions at a staggering rate. This was discovered when Obamacare was being created and surveys were taken.
Going back on that clause will have an effect on rape victims. Period.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/06/17 10:35 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
Rape as a pre-existing condition.
I can't even explain properly the anger I feel. What on earth is wrong with these people? |
Maybe you can point out the actual passage of the bill that says that.
It's a foolish piece of legislation, but throwing phony sensationalist sound bites out there hardly advances the discussion. |
You're a big boy, you can figure out how it works. |
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/05/blog-posting/headlines-say-gop-bill-makes-sexual-assault-pre-ex/
This bill is such a dumpster fire that there are plenty of places to attack it. There really is no need to reach for the sensational half-truths (or in this case sensational mostly-falses). I mean, it is so bad that there are things that are 100% true that are just as insane. |
It's not sensational half truths.
|
You say that, but then go on to describe exactly what a "half-truth" is. What you are describing is a serious concern, but it is a problem with how "preexisting conditions" are defined, not whether or not they are covered. The bill does not do anything to define them, and it is entirely possible for this bill to exist and for regulatory agencies to disallow insurance companies from doing this. Will they? We should be legitimately worried that they won't, but that does not mean that this bill specifically makes rape a "preexisting condition". The PolitiFact article does an excellent job at making this distinction and explaining why these claims are "mostly false".
There are times to spin half-truths, this just doesn't seem to be one of them. This bill is a disgusting piece of legislation that will harm millions of Americans, and has plenty of places where this can be pointed out without having to resort to spin. There are also ways to phrase the issue about the potential harm to victims of sexual assault which would be wholly accurate, and quite beneficial to bring to light. But making absolute statements about how this bill will directly make rape a preexisting condition is disingenuous at best, and will make it sound like those opposed to this bill are playing typical politics and have to stretch to find issues to complain about.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66887
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15730
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
|
|
This phenomenon makes me ashamed to be American. My Canadian and Euro friends are laffing their asses off.