Sat Jun 24, 2017, 08:34 AM
nikibatts (2,198 posts)
Listening to the GOP pro-repeal and replace it becomes more obvious to me what is driving them.
Most of those complaining loudly and visibly on TV are complaining because they are wealthy enough so that the government need not subsidize them. These are mostly millionaires and the group of upper middle-classes who could actually AFFORD to pay their healthcare costs under the old system, even at the escalating costs BEFORE Obamacare. They are angry that they have to pay for care without help from the government. They are bitter that many people are so poor or disabled that the government give them huge subsidies to help them pay for their care. It's almost like "subsidy envy." Even though they can afford to pay out of their own pocket because they are wealthy, they don't want to if it means that some unemployed minority or elderly person get help from the government. If there were no subsidies for others, they would go ahead and pay the exorbitant medical costs as they have in the past, feeling superior because they can afford good care. Everyone else they regard as "undeserving."
It doesn't matter how they received their own wealth, with most of it being "UNEARNED" as in the case of their dear orange President. The difference between most wealthy Democrats and wealthy Republicans is that wealthy Democrats for the most part do not mind paying taxes, and do not mind that their fellow less fortunate citizens receive help from the government.
|
4 replies, 2550 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
nikibatts | Jun 2017 | OP |
WinkyDink | Jun 2017 | #1 | |
Blues Heron | Jun 2017 | #2 | |
hedda_foil | Jun 2017 | #3 | |
snot | Jun 2017 | #4 |
Response to nikibatts (Original post)
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 08:37 AM
WinkyDink (51,311 posts)
1. The wealthy have made it personal to themselves; i.e., as Mulvaney phrases it: "Taking from
tax-payers to give to others. Why?"
Never mind that the "others" are also tax-payers. |
Response to nikibatts (Original post)
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 08:47 AM
Blues Heron (4,263 posts)
2. They're going to like a unversal basic income even less
Even though most of them have gotten ginormous allowances their whole life.
|
Response to nikibatts (Original post)
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 10:51 AM
hedda_foil (15,759 posts)
3. They never needed to buy an individual policy. They were insured through their jobs.
That's also how the pukes bamboozled people into believing their lies about the ACA. It's people who had tried to buy insurance on their own and were refused due to preexisting whatevers or charged up the wazoo for high risk pool policies or left high and dry because they made a couple of bucks above the poverty level, or bought a policy with a low premium that turned out to cover nothing... it's those people and their families who benefited from the ACA.
|
Response to nikibatts (Original post)
Sat Jun 24, 2017, 11:10 AM
snot (10,266 posts)
4. And note, Congressional reps have their own, excellent insurance coverage.
It seems that almost no one in government or the media appreciates how difficult it is for people to get decent coverage in many parts of the country, especially if they don't work for a big company – and thanks to the elimination of so many full-time jobs over recent decades, a very large chunk of the population doesn't.
|