Lion of the Blogosphere

Obamacare here to stay? Lol

According to Bloomberg, instead of “repealing” Obamacare, some Republicans are now talking about “repairing” it: an admission that Obamacare was actually what Americans wanted, and if only Republicans in Congress and the Big Insurance lobby hadn’t stuffed it full of poison pills, it could have been much better healthcare in the first place.

This also demonstrates that Republicans (especially Republican voters, but also Republican politicians) primarily hated Obamacare because it came from Obama.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

February 2, 2017 at 9:21 am

43 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The big thing that has to be done is give relief to the middle class who have seen horrible rate increases and loss of plans they at least didn’t hate and that will come at the expense of …….

    Before Obamacare, our health insurance landscape was not nirvana and it won’t be whether abandoned or tweaked.

    Joseph Moroco

    February 2, 2017 at 10:00 am

  2. This all may be true but it also reflects the fact that once an entitlement is granted it is almost impossible to take away


    February 2, 2017 at 10:05 am

    • ZeroCare created no new entitlements or welfare goodies — doh!

      The closest thing to a new entitlement is the requirement that insurance companies sell policies for the same price regardless of preexisting illness — essentially, insurers can no longer ask about customers about preexisting illness and price the policy accordingly. This is a miniscule sliver of the population, 0.3% tops. And only high-deductible ($8,000) policies are affordable for middle/working class, which for most people is like having no insurance at all — almost nobody has 8,000 quid in savings.


      February 2, 2017 at 11:38 am

      • @hard9bf: only high-deductible ($8,000) policies are affordable for middle/working class, which for most people is like having no insurance at all

        The subsidy disappears at about $48K income for a single plan. (I think the income cut-off goes higher based on family size?) Below the income cutt-off the subsidies get fairly generous. Working class folks can get a well-subsidize, reasonably low deductible obamacare plan at low to no cost.

        Beside, most middle class (and many working class) get health insurance through their employer, so obamacare is a non-issue.

        If one can’t get a subsidy, then the only benefit of an obamacare plan is that the max annual out-of-packet will at least prevent one from medical bankruptcy in the event of a medical catastrophe.

        E. Rekshun

        February 2, 2017 at 12:09 pm

      • “Beside, most middle class (and many working class) get health insurance through their employer, so Obamacare is a non-issue.”

        Middle class people aren’t *that* stupid. Employers aren’t buying insurance for their employees, they are paying their employees for their labor with salary and benefits. If the government didn’t require health insurance as one of those benefits, employees would receive some other commensurate mix of compensation. When I see that my family’s employer-obtained health insurance is costing $2000/mo with high a deductible, I feel ripped off.

        February 2, 2017 at 6:03 pm

  3. I wish they would back-burner this. Sure, Obamacare has a bunch of stupidities that need fixing, and it’s really screwing over a lot of people. But this could ride another year. The Republicans should be focused on immigration, immigration, jobs and trade (which includes regulation roll backs), immigration, making peace with Russia, pulling the U.S. military out of multiple hell holes, immigration, immigration, jobs and trade. Somewhere later we can worry about Obamacare or tax reform.

    But they are called Republicucks for a reason. And even while they are drifting towards Trump a bit because his approvals are good, they will stab him in the back in a second. He can’t trust those TruCon scum (to coin a phrase!).

    Meanwhile, I’m wondering when the Prog street armies will hit outrage burnout.


    February 2, 2017 at 10:08 am

    • Tax reform is worthy of putting on the front burner; it’ll have a yuge stimulative effect (and we need growth right now to get political capital to deal with immigration; we can worry about the debt later) and the 20% don’t-call-it-a-tariff is such a remarkably good policy idea it’s hard to believe it came from the congressional GOP.


      February 2, 2017 at 10:58 am

  4. Trump holds all the cards here. He’s not going to sign anything that doesn’t eliminate the mandate, significantly reduce health insurance costs, health care costs and increase freedom of choice in healthcare.

    So if the Congress doesn’t get in line, then Obamacare continues its catastrophic collapse and the Dems will get the blame since it’s their program.

    Andrew E.

    February 2, 2017 at 10:21 am

    • Without a “mandate” or without a big increase in government funding, private-insurance-provided affordable healthcare won’t work.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 2, 2017 at 10:32 am

      • You’re basically arguing for single payer. Will never happen and would be a disaster for whites if it did since 80% of whites would be subsidizing government healthcare for 90% of minorities with the additional benefit that costs would always increase and never decrease.

        The solution to healthcare is to create a two-tier system. A larger one for responsible people who get great care and service with lots of choices at low prices and a much smaller one that gives humane but decidedly unspectacular care and service for life’s inevitable losers.

        Andrew E.

        February 2, 2017 at 10:47 am

      • Poor minorities already get single-payer free healthcare. It’s called Medicaid. Healthcare for everyone would be a great benefit for middle-class whites, they would be getting their tax money back in the form of free helthcare that the poor already get.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        February 2, 2017 at 11:29 am

      • Nope. Because soon the system would be overloaded and the system would discriminate and ration in favor of minorities and against whites. Like night follows day.

        Andrew E.

        February 2, 2017 at 11:32 am

      • If Republicans, who are the majority, create a system that does not discriminate based on what you think it will discriminate against, then it won’t.

        And by the way, Medicaid is completely neutral. If you qualify by having low-enough income, you get the same benefits regardless of race.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        February 2, 2017 at 11:34 am

      • Medicaid is still a relatively small part of the total medical care system, public and private, and it gets its funding every year like clockwork. And, as you say, qualification is by income so a posture of neutrality is still defensible. But if the entire healthcare system were taken over by the government under single payer then the fault lines would change completely as the pressures inevitably build up in a system that grows and grows, becoming more and more sclerotic with fewer services, more frequent customers, less staffing, more third world doctors, more rationing and with costs spiraling out of control. Whites will be hit hardest without question, and certainly compared to what they could get in a system that rewards personal responsibility. Medical tourism for whites will become a thing and over time we’re back to a healthcare system funded by whites for minorities as the productive leave the country for vacations and health care.

        A secondary point, but Medicaid is not the two-tier system I describe above. Under Medicaid the healthcare is substantially the same as you get with private care. Under two-tier, the lower tier would not be receiving the same level of care as those who pay for it.

        Andrew E.

        February 2, 2017 at 12:32 pm

      • “Medicaid is still a relatively small part of the total medical care system, public and private, and it gets its funding every year like clockwork.”

        medicaid/medicare are 37% of all health insurance spending vs private health insurance at 33%. my source is the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

    • Andrew E is absolutely correct here. I cannot understand why white person (or Asian for that matter) would advocate putting their health care in the hands of a bureaucratic system which is openly hostile to whites. These people view whites as uniquely evil and deserving of punishment! They openly talk about exterminating whites, and yet you want them to make decisions about your healthcare!


      February 2, 2017 at 4:15 pm

      • “I cannot understand why white person (or Asian for that matter) would advocate putting their health care in the hands of a bureaucratic system which is openly hostile to whites. ”

        They have a health problem and can’t afford treatment. That is one reason they might advocate this.

        Jokah Macpherson

        February 3, 2017 at 8:45 am

  5. There is no way to get the 60 votes needed to actually repeal Obamacare. The best that can be done is some poaching around the edges by removing what can be repealed through reconciliation. But it’s overall a stupid law. Even McCain’s 2008 proposal was better, and it wasn’t great.

    Mike Street Station

    February 2, 2017 at 10:38 am

    • They don’t need 60 votes — they can defund it the same way the Democreeps passed it, via budget reconciliation. They already did this when Barry was obstructing the White House, but now we have a cooperative, non-obstructive President.


      February 2, 2017 at 11:41 am

      • That doesn’t help if you can’t get a replacement passed because you don’t have 60 votes.

        Mike Street Station

        February 2, 2017 at 1:04 pm

      • “hard9bf” is correct. a replacement also doesn’t need 60 votes. the democrats set the precedent under the assumption they had a permanent majority. just let people buy medicaid or medicare coverage.

  6. Lion,
    Here is another example of the Deep State coordinating against Trump.

    I’m not trying to be overly pessimistic. I do genuinely think the Deep State will bring down Trump by the summer.


    February 2, 2017 at 10:46 am

    • How are they going to do that? He has total support from the Republican base. He also has some deep state support in the form of Flynn and Mattis. Rank and file law enforcement and military overwhelmingly support him.

      If you want to say that the deep state will bring Trump down, then provide a mechanism for how they will do so or else you are no better than a NeoGaf cuck.

      Otis the Sweaty

      February 2, 2017 at 9:04 pm

  7. Look, the problem with all entitlements or welfare is the fact that we are burdened by an ever increasing black/brown population that game and drain the system.

    All this socialist/social safety net stuff could maybe sorta work in a homegenous society, but in the society we have it’s just another weapon against the middle.


    February 2, 2017 at 10:57 am

    • Exactly, and why do we need cucks? Cucks are anti-darwinian.


      February 2, 2017 at 12:05 pm

    • Some Whites game and drain the system, but most blacks/browns are happy to live in da hood 4 life, keepin’ it real, gnome sayin’? The full-time welfare lifestyle affords a quality of life higher than black/brown people get in the Tird World, and the wonderful thing is it’s all FREE, no work required. Amazing stuff.

      White people create welfare systems that provide for a marginal, lousy existence that is depressing and unacceptable for most White people in the long-term, so it’s a temporary, embarrassing circumstance that Whites make every effort to transcend. That’s why we need a fence to keep out Tird World masses happy to live in squalor.


      February 2, 2017 at 12:21 pm

      • Wait till automation comes in and renders most humans obsolete in the labor force.

        I’m scratching my head and wondering if Yakov is correct. Capitalism made America great for everyone?

        After years of wasteful consumption, what did most Americans achieve from working and earning money? Not much. In other 1st world nations, people would have use that time to self-actualize and find something meaningful to do with their lives than to live a routine-rodent wheel scenario.


        February 2, 2017 at 9:17 pm

  8. The Obamacare repeal and replace blueprint that Republicans start out with was left over from 2012. It assume Romney won and they could quickly repeal Obamacare in 2013 before it took full effect in 2014. They could then replace it with anything and claim the replacement was better than Obamacare.

    In 2017 Obamacare has already taken full effect. People now have a much better idea what Obamacare is. Most people will tell you the insurance is too expensive and the co-pays/deductibles are too high. The TruCon Republicans think that Obamacare premium support is too high, people should be paying higher premiums and co-pays/deductibles should be higher so people have more skin in the game. This disconnect makes it unlikely any Republican replacement plan that made it through Congress would be viewed as better than Obamacare by anyone other than TruCons.

    Not being able to immediately repeal Obamacare also puts a wrench in another TruCon dream, block granting Medicaid to the states.

    Currently the federal government subsides Medicaid for the states. During a recession when more people qualify for Medicaid, federal dollars to the states go up. When fewer people qualify, federal dollars go down. Block granting would just give the states a fixed amount of money based on some formula, The original plan was to base that on current Medicaid spending in each state, and then just cut from there. Something like each state starts out with 75% of the money they are getting now. Republicans in Congress think this is a clever idea, since it allows them to make big cuts in federal medicaid spending without being responsible for taking anyone’s medical insurance away. It would be up to states to figure out what to do. States could makeup for the lost federal funding, but probably most would kick people off Medicaid. If people died because they lost Medicaid, it would be the state governments fault, not the federal.

    Obviously, state level Republicans do not find this plan quite as clever as Congressional Republicans do and are starting to say that out loud. The other big problem is the Obamacare Medicaid expansion. States that took the Medicaid expansion are getting more dollars now than states that did not. If Medicaid is block granted based on Medicaid spending now without repealing the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, states that did not take the expansion get screwed forever, and those are all Republican controlled states.

    Mike CA

    February 2, 2017 at 10:58 am

    • “If people died because they lost Medicaid, it would be the state governments fault, not the federal.”

      Hysteria. People die from disease, not from lack of medical care insurance.

      The medicaid expansion is politically irrelevant because it marginally increased medicaid eligibility by about $3500 per year, so people earning up to about $16,000 now qualify for medicaid under ZeroCare. These are mostly young people who use little to no medical care. Older part-time welfare grifters are savvy enough to keep their income below a certain amount lest they lose their bennies (and they know this amount to the penny), so thanks to ZeroCare they can work a couple extra hours a week while keeping their medicaid and other gibsmedat.

      It’s hard to fault these part-time welfare grifters — they COULD work 40 hours/week, but their lifestyle would be essentially the same as working 20 hours a week plus foodstamps, medicaid, free electricity, obamaphone, and even SSI.


      February 2, 2017 at 12:08 pm

      • The medicaid expansion is HUGE. The ASSETS requirement was removed. Previously, only dirt-poor people qualified: people with too low time orientation to have savings. Now, a middle-class person with low income gets it. HUGE difference.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        February 2, 2017 at 12:09 pm

      • “Now, a middle-class person with low income gets it. HUGE difference.”

        Since when is $13,000 to $16,000 per year middle class?

        People making $16,000 a year have neither savings nor significant assets.

        You’re highly exceptional, Lion, because you made good bank for years (and probably saved a healthy chunk of it), quit your job when you were denied a promotion, and now make a few thousand per year with blog ads, so you would qualify for medicaid even though you’re not actually poor. How many people live life like that? A few thousand in the entire nation, tops. That’s not a HUGE population.


        February 2, 2017 at 12:30 pm

      • Again hardie9bf — what have most Americans achieve, beside working and consuming junk?


        February 2, 2017 at 9:22 pm

  9. “Obamacare was actually what Americans wanted”

    I don’t know anyone who likes ZeroCare — they either have no opinion (because their employers provide medical care insurance) or they hate it, nothing in between.

    And ZeroCare benefits almost no one. Lazy welfare moochers were already getting free [sic] medical care before ZeroCare was signed. There’s a miniscule population of decent working people with diseases and ailments who couldn’t get medical care insurance but now qualify for an $8,000 deductible ‘insurance’ policy thanks to ZeroCare. For some people that might be a benefit, for others it makes no difference — most people don’t have $8000 lying around. But these are the only putative beneficiaries of ZeroCare. It’s hard to find accurate data on this population, but it’s likely fewer than 500,000 citizens.

    Since ZeroCare benefits at most half a million Americans, it’ll be easy to repeal.


    February 2, 2017 at 11:21 am

    • Ah, but it benefits insurance company executives, pharmaceutical company executives, medical devices company executives and their shareholders immensely. That is what Obamacare basically is: a largish tax on the middle class which mostly goes into the pockets of such people. A small amount of the money is used to provide a fig leaf: maybe 10-20% percent of the costs actually go into health care. It is almost a textbook case of the kind of theft by government which goes on in third world countries.


      February 2, 2017 at 4:20 pm

  10. instead of “repealing” Obamacare, some Republicans are now talking about “repairing”

    Just like “mend it don’t end it!”

    E. Rekshun

    February 2, 2017 at 11:59 am

  11. Obamacare wasn’t that bad. They just didn’t go far enough with it. They don’t want to give to the people. They just want to take from the middle and give to the higher and lower. Same ol’ s***

    Fact Checker

    February 2, 2017 at 12:44 pm

  12. I keep posting this on iSteve, and pointing out that smart paleos like you, Derb, and many others that killing The ACA would destroy Trump by causing 10 million or more to lose health insurance as well as making Trump “own” a healthcare system that will always be unpopular.

    Yet the underclass will continue to get free Medicaid even if the ACA is repealed. The main benefit of the ACA was the WWC.


    February 2, 2017 at 2:42 pm

  13. obamacare is bad:
    1. expands welfare (megan mcardle points out a disproportionate share of the subsidy benefits go to immigrants)
    2. entrenches the health insurance-job link via the employer mandate
    3. doesn’t allow cross border insurance purchases (the exchanges are linked to your state of residency)
    4. requires too many things to be covered under “insurance,” which leads to higher costs

    it would have been a lot better to do the following:
    1. tax the hell out of alcohol, tobacco, and sugar/sweeteners
    2. invoke the inter-state commerce clause to allow cross-border insurance sales
    3. allowed medicaid/medicare to negotiate drug prices (massive corporate give-away)
    4. allowed people to buy medicaid or medicare if they’re incomes were over the threshold.
    5. create a medicaid/medicare reinsurance scheme. if your insurance company pays out extremely high claims, the government will pick up an increasing share of your medical expenses.

  14. The problem isn’t with the mandate. I support the mandate. I even support a subsidy for those who really need it. The problem is that leftists don’t want to help those who need help. Rather, they want socialized medicine. They use entitlements as a wealth redistribution scheme. They’re constantly pushing to expand entitlement programs while refusing to reign in costs or crack down on abuses. That’s unsustainable.


    February 2, 2017 at 5:56 pm

  15. If the big problem with Obamacare is the name, then there is a huge opportunity for Trump. Government just need to license the name TrumpCare from the Trump organization. America would then have great healthcare and Trump would have a new stream of licensing revenue.


    February 3, 2017 at 12:38 am

  16. Bloomberg news. Wall street for Wall street. Here on Main Street, its not healthcare, its another government scam. They take your money and you get less. The only ones who get any “care” are Medicaid poor who still have to go to clinics because Doctors don’t want any more charity cases. This was a scam from the get-go. Its not about healthcare at all. Its a slush fund for insiders called “exchanges”. Exchanges do nothing at all but collect money. The only ones who get anything are Medicaid recipients who find doctors and hospitals aren’t accepting any patients. You know, they can either repeal this, or deal with their voters. I have a feeling ropes are waiting at their next town hall if they say they can’t repeal. Yeah say it to the new rope Buster.

    Joshua Sinistar

    February 3, 2017 at 1:02 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: