• Update on weirdness

    Update on site issues: (1. replies now need a title *and* something in the message box, 2. certain links are causing strange pop-ups on Apple devices, and 3. Some folks can't type anything into the text box.) Basically, a series of unfortunate events set us back on testing. We'll get to it as soon as we can, and hopefully things can get fixed by this weekend if not before.  More info: https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/site-problems-more-info/

Home Main Forums Latest Breaking News If Obamacare Is Repealed, Advocates Expect "Meaner and Skimpier" Replacement

  • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
    Profile photo of Akallabeth

    If Obamacare Is Repealed, Advocates Expect "Meaner and Skimpier" Replacement

    Leaner and meaner indeed!

    In describing the GOP’s goals of a leaner, meaner health insurance program as part of their road to dismantlement of the healthcare safety net, PNHP co-founder Steffie Woolhandler explained how Americans will have to maintain continuous insurance coverage without missing a single bill by even one day, to keep pre-existing condition coverage.  (Otherwise, they likely will lose insurance coverage of claims while still having to pay  for six months or more to prevent people buying coverage when they are sick but not when they are healthy – “free riding”.)  This will guarantee that the most costly first few months of serious illnesses will be borne financially in toto by the poorest and increase the chance that they will be bankrupted before the insurance pays a single penny.

    (Free riding is a health insurance industry term for people buying health insurance only when they are sick and need it.)

    https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/9/repeal_run_republicans_move_to_axe

    and

    https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/10/part_2_if_obamacare_is_repealed

    Enthusiast, glinda, LiberalElite and 1 otherLynetta like this
    "Out of many, one"

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
11 replies
  • pinduck (1109 posts)
    Profile photo of pinduck Donor

    1. Which is leaner&meaner: Medicare with a 3% overhead or for-profit insurance

    with a 15% to 18% overhead?

    Leaner & meaner for the American people; not so for the corporRats.

    "Sometimes I feel like Fletcher Christian..."
  • Abakan (2578 posts)
    Profile photo of Abakan Moderator Emeritus

    2. You can bet that whatever they do…

    It will be meaner, more evil than we can think.

    I’m just hoping if we all survive until the next election they get what’s coming to them.

    I think this will piss more people off than they think.

    tinkle_tinkle_little_czar_sticker

    • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
      Profile photo of Akallabeth

      3. Next election won't be able to change it

      Unless we pay a kings ransom in money for nothing.

       

      The “expected lost profits” of the health insurance industry.  You can find the exact procedure if you look up GATS Article XXI.

      Because of the 1998 “standstill” clause and this GATS lock-in. Progressive liberalisation” is one way only.

      Like a fish trap, or “ratchet”.  We go in but we can’t go out.

      Treaty says so.

      This is why it was so important that Bernie win. Its going to cost each of us at least an extra two thirds of a million dollars because of the loss just on health care alone. (VERY conservative estimate based on old year 2000 data for lifetime distribution of health care costs per capita rising by the CPI for everything, from then until now -not healthcare CPI which is MUCH higher but which I don’t know. For example, many Rx drugs have increased in cost several hundred percent in the last few years alone..)

      "Out of many, one"
  • RufusTFirefly (1111 posts)
    Profile photo of RufusTFirefly Donor

    4. Oh swell! Mine is already pretty mean and skimpy

    It’s got an astronomical deductible that renders it virtually useless.

    Not only that, but the premiums recently doubled.

    I’d be better off paying a protection racket.

    I hate when we’re put in the position of defending the indefensible. It reminds me of people who felt they had to vote for Hillary.

    • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
      Profile photo of Akallabeth

      5. Business needs stability.

      Its not about us.

      The United States is open for business.

       

      What if you could afford insurance that paid for everything – assuming you qualified when you first applied and maintained continuous coverage, but there was one condition, to get care you would have to receive any costly procedures or extended treatments in the Republic of Bananastan.

      And any disputes between you (or your survivors) and the providers about the quality of care were preempted into the Bananastani court system?

      "Out of many, one"
      • RufusTFirefly (1111 posts)
        Profile photo of RufusTFirefly Donor

        6. I have friends and close family members who live in "civilized" countries

        I realize our health care headaches are utterly needless.

        • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
          Profile photo of Akallabeth

          8. They had public healthcare not commercial systems

          like us.

          3.13 GATS
          5
          1.
          SCOPE AND DEFINITION
          On completion of this section, the reader will be able:
          to evaluate whether a particular measure is covered by the GATS;
          to assess whether, in a particular situation, there is “trade in
          services”;
          to identify each of the four modes of supply of services;
          to prepare a claim or a defence on the fundamental question of
          whether or not the GATS applies in a particular dispute settlement
          case.
          This section of the Module examines discuss the scope of application of the
          GATS. Article II:1 of the GATS expressly provides that it applies to “any
          measure covered by this Agreement”. The Appellate Body, in
          Canada – Certain
          Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry
          (“
          Canada – Autos
          ”)
          2
          , stated that
          a threshold question, for a panel in any case involving claims under the GATS,
          is whether the measure is within the scope of the GATS by examining whether
          it is a measure “affecting trade in services” within the meaning of Article I of
          the GATS.
          3
          The relevant part of Article I reads as follows:
          1. This Agreement applies to measures by Members affecting trade in services.
          To understand fully the meaning of Article I:1 each element of the phrase
          “measures by Members affecting trade in services” must be examined sparately.
          To do so, it is necessary to understand certain definitions contained in Articles
          I and XXVIII of the GATS.
          1.1
          Measures by Members Affecting Trade in Services
          The phrase “measures by Members affecting trade in services” is defined in
          Article XXVIII of the GATS. The definition states as follows:
          (c) “measures by Members affecting trade in services” include measures in
          respect of
          (i)
          the purchase, payment or use of a service;
          (ii)
          the
          access to and use of, in connection with the supply of a
          service, services which are required by those Members to be
          offered to the public generally;
          (iii)
          the pr
          esence, including commercial presence, of persons of a
          Member for the supply of a service in the territory of another
          Member;
          Objectives
          Article I
          Scope and Definition
          Article XXVIII
          Definitions
          2
          Report of the Appellate Body, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, adopted on 19 June 2000.
          3
          Ibid.

          , para. 152

          This definition, in and of itself, does not provide a precise meaning to the
          phrase “measures by Members affecting trade in services”. It only provides a
          list of certain types of measures that will be considered as coming within the
          meaning of that phrase. It is important to note that this definition gives some
          examples of the types of measures that would come within the scope of the
          GATS, but it is not an exclusive list.
          To give the expression a more precise meaning, it is essential to examine its
          constitutive elements individually.
          1.2
          Measures by Members
          Article I:3(a) of the GATS defines the expression “measures by Members”
          very broadly. According to this definition, the GATS covers virtually all levels
          of government activity – central, regional or local as well as non-governmental
          bodies that have powers delegated to them by governments. Article I:3(a)
          reads as follows:
          3. For the purposes of this Agreement:
          (a)
          “measures by Members” means measures taken by:
          (i)
          central, regional or local governments and authorities; and
          (ii)
          non-governmental bodies in the exercise of powers delegated
          by central, regional or local governments or authorities.
          In fulfilling its obligations and commitments under the Agreement, each
          Member shall take such reasonable measures as may be available to it to
          ensure their observance by regional and local governments and authorities
          and non-governmental bodies within its territory;
          The term “measure” is defined in Article XXVIII of the GATS as follows:
          (a)
          “measure” means any measure by a Member, whether in the form
          of a law, regulation, rule, procedure, decision, administrative action,
          or any other form;
          As a result of the combined effect of these two definitions, the obligations and
          disciplines of the GATS apply to all forms of intervention by central, regional
          and local governments as well as non-governmental bodies with delegated
          governmental powers. A “measure” includes laws, regulations, rules and
          decisions of courts and administrative authorities, but it also covers practices
          and actions of governments or non-governmental bodies with delegated
          governmental powers. Examples of measures would include legislation of a
          Member, by-laws of a municipal authority, and rules adopted by professional
          bodies in respect of professional qualifications and licensing. All such measures
          could potentially come within the scope of the GATS.
          It is important to note that each Member has an obligation to take reasonable
          measures to ensure that all “sub-national” levels of government and non-
          governmental bodies with delegated governmental powers within its territory
          comply with the disciplines of the GATS. This obligation is similar to the
          obligation found in Article XXIV:12 of the GATT 1994 relating to trade in
          goods.
          4
          The question of whether or not a particular action of a government constitutes
          a “measure by a Member” within the meaning of Article I:1 has not specifically
          arisen as yet in any WTO dispute settlement case. However, there could be
          cases in the future in which this issue could be important. For example, in a
          case involving actions of a non-governmental body, it could be disputed whether
          that body exercises governmental powers delegated to it by a government.
          The scope of the GATS, however, does not extend to actions of purely private
          persons or enterprises which do not exercise any delegated governmental
          powers.
          1.3
          Affecting Trade in Services
          The phrase “affecting trade in services” has been interpreted by the Appellate
          Body. In
          Canada – Autos
          , the Appellate Body stated that “two key issues
          must be examined to determine whether a measure is one ‘affecting trade in
          services’”. Those issues are:
          … first, whether there is “trade in services” in the sense of Article I:2; and,
          second, whether the measure in issue “affects” such trade in services within
          the meaning of Article I:1.
          5
          1.3.1
          Trade in Services
          The first issue to determine in a particular dispute settlement case is whether
          there is “trade in services”. Article I:2 of the GATS defines the concept of
          “trade in services” as “the supply of a service” within one of four defined
          “modes of supply”. It reads as follows:
          2. For the purpose of this Agreement, trade in services is defined as the
          supply of a service:
          (a)
          from the territory of one Member into the territory of any other
          Member;
          (b)
          in the territory of one Member to the service consumer of any other
          Member;
          (c)
          by a service supplier of one Member, through commercial presence
          in the territory of any other Member;
          (d)
          by a service supplier of one Member, through presence of natural
          persons of a Member in the territory of any other Member.
          Article I
          Scope and Definition
          4
          See the
          Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the General Agreement on Tariffs
          and Trade 1994,
          paras. 13-15.
          5
          Report of the Appellate Body,
          Canada – Autos
          ,
          supra

          , note 2, para. 155

           

          "Out of many, one"
  • Major Hogwash (2314 posts)
    Profile photo of Major Hogwash

    7. Akin to a first aid kit; some band aids, a few aspirin, and some alcohol swabs.

    Want to see a doctor, make an appointment. Want a healthcare insurance company to pay for it, ya gotta be kidding!!

    Deductibles will double.

    • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
      Profile photo of Akallabeth

      9. The system has to be preserved, and expanded, nomatter what the cost is in human

      lives.

      Otherwise public health care will win.

      And then the whole system falls apart. Poor people will get the same healthcare as rich people.

      And live as long!

      Even though 75% of the people in developed countries will be unemployed by mid century.

      That will kill profits, instead of people.

       

      "Out of many, one"
      • Major Hogwash (2314 posts)
        Profile photo of Major Hogwash

        10. We'll all be employed by 2020.

        Trump sez so.

        It will be beautiful.

        We’ll all be shoveling snow!!!

        • Akallabeth (2234 posts)
          Profile photo of Akallabeth

          11. Cutting lawns with scissors in Pyongyang!

          Ever seen em?

          "Out of many, one"