Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Fate of Obamacare under President Trump

Discussion in 'USA' started by NewsBot, Nov 9, 2016.

Tags:
  1. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    From Scientific American:
    How Quickly Could Obamacare Be Erased?

     
  2. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

  3. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  4. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  5. admin

    admin Administrator Staff Member

  6. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

    Trump did NOT take a u-turn on ObamaDon'tCare...he merely stated that he would retain THE only two portions of it that the Dems rolled out first and represented the "reasonable" portions of it...pre-existing conditions and health-care for children up to the age of 26 under their parents plan.

    Chief Justice Roberts ruled that ObamaDon'tCare is a tax...therefore the Senate can overturn it with a simple majority...51 votes. There are some pundits that believe we should return to what was available prior to the Marxist legislation...with a few minor tweeks. I don't disagree with that assessment.
     
  7. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
    Many in Florida Count on Obama’s Health Law, Even Amid Talk of Its Demise
     
  8. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

  9. DrPod

    DrPod Active Member

  10. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

  11. DaVinci

    DaVinci Well-Known Member

  12. Dieter Fellner

    Dieter Fellner Well-Known Member

    OBAMA(Don't)CARE (formerly known as HillaryCare - now there's an oxymoron) was widely hailed to be a disaster by health professionals across the board (except for the pro-Obama pundits) .... unbelievably, Obama still now wants to cling on to the idea of the success of his 'legacy' - it's a total disaster. Even Bill Clinton, during the election campaign, admitted this truism. The socialized model of healthcare is an idyllic fantasy that does not work in a vast country like the USA. Heck ... it's not even working well in the UK anymore. I put my trust in Trump to fix it.
     
  13. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  14. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  15. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  16. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  17. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  18. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
  19. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
    PUBLIC RELEASE: 4-MAY-2017
    American College of Rheumatology responds to House passage of American Health Care Act
    Funding for high-risk pools is short-term fix for people with lifelong care needs, rheumatology leaders caution
    ATLANTA - The American College of Rheumatology's President, Sharad Lakhanpal, MBBS, MD, released a statement today in response to the U.S. House of Representatives passing the American Health Care Act (AHCA). In the response, Lakhanpal expressed concern over the MacArthur amendment, states being able to opt out of essential coverage, and the $8 billion funding for high-risk pool being an insufficient, short-term fix.

    "If enacted in its current form, the legislation would make it harder for our patients to access the care they need to manage pain, avoid long-term disability, remain active in the workforce, and preserve their quality of life, " said Lakhanpal.

    "Changes made to the bill in recent weeks - specifically those outlined in the MacArthur Amendment - would allow states to opt out of many of the crucial consumer protections the ACA provides to chronic disease patients, including essential health benefits, the ban on health status underwriting, and the 3-to-1 age rating ratio. If states waive these protections, healthcare coverage will become unaffordable for individuals with pre-existing conditions like arthritis, and may lead to discrimination against individuals with certain high-cost medical conditions.

    "Furthermore, the $8 billion in additional funding for high-risk pools is a short-term fix for people with life-long care needs. High-risk pools have been historically underfunded, and chronically ill patients seeking this type of coverage regularly experience soaring deductibles and premiums. Without an official score from the Congressional Budget Office, there is no way to assess whether the additional funding would be enough to offset coverage losses for people living with arthritis."

    The ACR has outlined specific provisions that would need to be included in any replacement bill to ensure Americans have continued access to rheumatologic care.

    The complete statement is available on the ACR website.

    ###

    The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) is the nation's leading advocacy organization for the rheumatology care community, representing more than 9,500 rheumatologists and rheumatology health professionals. As an ethically driven, professional membership organization committed to improving healthcare for Americans living with rheumatic diseases, the ACR advocates for high-quality, high-value policies and reforms that will ensure safe, effective, affordable and accessible rheumatology care.
     
  20. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
    PUBLIC RELEASE: 22-MAY-2017
    Obamacare support: When polls mention repeal it seals the deal

    ITHACA, N.Y. - With the U.S. Senate set to take up debate on a new health care bill, Cornell researchers asked a simple question: Does the American public want former President Obama's health care law repealed and replaced?
    It depends on how you ask the question.
    The researchers analyzed hundreds of national opinion polls from March 2010, when Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, through the recent presidential election. They wanted to know whether different wording in survey questions would predict support for "Obamacare."
    Support for Obamacare is significantly higher -- by about 9 percentage points -- when the survey question explicitly mentions "repeal" or "repeal or replace" as an option, they found. The study was published May 4 in Health Communication.
    "Given that 'repeal and replace' really has been the mantra of Republican lawmakers, it's interesting that polls mentioning that term don't show higher support for getting rid of the law. It actually seems to put people in a mindset where they support the existing law even more," said co-author Jonathon Schuldt, assistant professor of communication at Cornell University.
    Co-author Jeff Niederdeppe, associate professor of communication at Cornell, and his colleagues hypothesize that loss aversion, a well-researched concept in economics and psychology, may account for the law's greater support on questions that include "repeal" or "repeal and replace." That is, people generally want to avoid a loss more than they want an equivalent gain, he said.
    "When people have a law that has expanded health care options for tens of millions in the U.S., talking about taking it away seems to, if anything, increase people's support for it," Niederdeppe said.
    The research also points out that survey questions, depending on the polling organization, can take radically different forms, Schuldt said. As every good survey researcher knows, there's no right way to ask a question, Schuldt said. One must critically engage with the way survey questions are asked and the organization that's asking them to get a clearer understanding of public sentiment. "The wording of surveys matters more than we think."
    ###
    Cornell University has television, ISDN and dedicated Skype/Google+ Hangout studios available for media interviews. For more information, see this Cornell Chronicle story.
     
  21. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-ryan-obamacare-will-collapse-under-its-own-weight/

    Obama having to raid funds from Fannie and Freddie was bad enough...and completely illegal...in order to pay for this bloated, Marxist Law. Medicine, in the US, is struggling trying to counter socialism with free market solutions. It may not work, because socialism is like heroin to the masses, and once a person is addicted, it's almost impossible to reverse that dependency. The Democrats like to call this, "the third rail of government". The answer is education and enlightenment.
     
  22. efuller

    efuller MVP

    The answer is education and enlightenment. First off, using general funds is not raiding Fannie and Freddie. The right wing web site that told you that is not a credible source. The ACA was passed in such a way that there is a law saying the government should pay for the subsidies, but the money was not allocated. So, no matter what a president decides to do they won't be obeying a law.

    If you want to prevent Americans from going bankrupt when they get sick and can't work anymore then you have to provide medical care. The ACA was based on a free market Republican plan to have insurance companies pay for peoples medical care. This is modeled off of Romneycare in Massachusetts. Socialized medicine would be Medicare for all. The problem is the "free market" solution of providing health care doesn't work without some government subsidy of the cost of insurance. The ACA is not about to collapse under its own weight. The Republicans can't make up their mind if they are going to continue funding the insurance subsidy. The insurance companies are all threatening to back out of the market because of the uncertainty of the subsidy. If the Markets collapse it will because of the removal of the individual mandate and insurance payment subsidies. Healthy people will take the gamble that they won't get sick and decide not buy insurance. The insurance companies will have to charge higher premiums and more people wont' buy. That is the the death spiral that will be caused by the Republicans choosing not to fund the subsidy. But the Republicans will claim that they didn't do it and get their lackeys to post all over the web that the ACA was going to collapse on its own.

    Insurance is having healthy people and the sick people pay for the care of the sick.
     
  23. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

    Yep...education and enlightenment. You should review your basic civics class material again. Which branch of government can appropriate money? What's the difference between non-discretionary and discretionary spending? The money appropriated by Congress for Fannie and Freddie...which category does that fall under? What Obama did is not dissimilar to what Moon Beam is doing out here in California currently. You're really struggling here. Let me assist you in your quest for the truth:

    http://www.bing.com/search?q=obama ...&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IENTTR&conversationid=
     
  24. raun

    raun Active Member

  25. drhunt1

    drhunt1 Well-Known Member

    I question the veracity of anything the LA Times prints. For instance, they are using the CBO report numbers to tell us that approx 23M people would be left without insurance under RyanCare. Is that number accurate? Nope. One needs to consider the facts. Further, this is the same CBO that wrecklessly agreed with Obama when he stated the average American family would experience a $2500/year savings under ObamaDon'tCare...a big lie.

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybe...-23-million-people-to-lose-insurance-n2331434

    While it's true that The Donald has a tougher road in the Senate, much of that is because there are too many RINO's currently in office. Until Trump can get a super-majority in the Senate, (could happen as early as Jan 2019), it will be tough sledding for much of his agenda to MAGA. I look at it as a litmus test to prove one's fitness for office. The GOP Congress will be judged by the same measures as the Dems have been since 2010.
     
Loading...

Share This Page