Post Election Discussion & News

[Singuy]

Credit for giving an order that 99.9% of Americans would have gave if in that position? No. It made absolutely no difference as to who was sitting in that chair when the Intelligence came in. Based on your thinking, every single person who voted for Obama should get some credit as well. They helped put him in the chair. Why not give them credit as well.

And there are millions that would agree with me regarding the health insurance. Our country has a huge spending problem and Obamacare just added to the problem. It also caused the private sector to change how they offer health insurance to the detriment of millions.

Obamacare did a lot of good but it absolutely squeezed the private sector from gaining the profit they were used to. Being obligated to insure those with pre-existing condition just kills any insurance profits..imagine allowing to buy car insurance AFTER the accident. This is why premiums are going up because they simply can't laugh their way to the bank anymore off the back of sick people.

Our hospital put in so many obamacare mandatory measures (such as insurance will not reimburse if pt comes back within 30 days) which is driving the increasing cost of health care lower (meaning healthcare cost is still increasing, but at a much slower pace than prior to the ACA).

I agree, the ACA is not a win for 99% of the people because it was not for 99% of the people..but it's healthcare program in a long while that at least TRIED to benefit the sick who were rejected before by insurance companies.

Also would the right blast Obama if Bin Ladin escaped and 20 soldiers were killed/captured during the raid? After all, it's Obama who signs off and gave the mission a green light. I mean Hillary got blamed for the Benghazi disaster even though she was not directly involved in any of it.

[disneysteve]

Obamacare did a lot of good but it absolutely squeezed the private sector from gaining the profit they were used to. Being obligated to insure those with pre-existing condition just kills any insurance profits..imagine allowing to buy car insurance AFTER the accident.

I agree, the ACA is not a win for 99% of the people because it was not for 99% of the people

I also agree that it didn't benefit 99%. Of course, it wasn't intended to either.

As for the analogy to car insurance, that's not accurate. Someone who has had an accident can still get insurance. They'll just pay a higher premium. But prior to the ACA, someone with a medical issue was uninsurable at any price. Getting rid of the pre-existing condition clause was a huge win for all Americans (okay, maybe not Medicare recipients, but everyone else). It was insane that someone with high blood pressure, for example, would change jobs and lose insurance coverage as a result because the new job's plan wouldn't accept them. That could happen to any of us.

[StormRichards]

Hillary was directly involved in HER lies about the attack. That is what I blame her for.

[StormRichards]

I also agree that it didn't benefit 99%. Of course, it wasn't intended to either.

As for the analogy to car insurance, that's not accurate. Someone who has had an accident can still get insurance. They'll just pay a higher premium. But prior to the ACA, someone with a medical issue was uninsurable at any price. Getting rid of the pre-existing condition clause was a huge win for all Americans (okay, maybe not Medicare recipients, but everyone else). It was insane that someone with high blood pressure, for example, would change jobs and lose insurance coverage as a result because the new job's plan wouldn't accept them. That could happen to any of us.

Yes, I am definitely glad he got rid of that clause and it is definitely a positive of the ACA. But his administration botched and lied about the cost of healthcare.gov That fact can't be ignored when you talk about the ACA

[Singuy]

Yes, I am definitely glad he got rid of that clause and it is definitely a positive of the ACA. But his administration botched and lied about the cost of healthcare.gov That fact can't be ignored when you talk about the ACA

Was there a lie or was there unexpected amount of healthy young individuals who rather pay the super low 2.5% tax penalty than to get the ACA? First couple of years, the ACA was actually pretty cheap. I know many pharmacy techs who qualified for subsidies took them and would rather buy obamacare than our employer provided health insurance.

Trump will soon realize that in order to keep the preexisting condition clause, there must be a mandate. Or the insurance company can cover you for 7k/month....so you got to pick your poison.

[disneysteve]

Yes, I am definitely glad he got rid of that clause and it is definitely a positive of the ACA. But his administration botched and lied about the cost of healthcare.gov That fact can't be ignored when you talk about the ACA

Rarely is there a government policy that is 100% positive for all. The ACA is certainly no exception. It accomplished some really good things and also has its faults. The whole pre-election rhetoric by Trump that he was going to totally eliminate the ACA was understandably upsetting to many people. Of course, after the election, he immediately changed his tune to say that the ACA has some good points and we should keep those and change other parts of it - which I am totally fine with. But still, I give the Obama administration credit for taking that huge first step to put something functional in place. It needs tweaks and adjustments but at least it's there to work on now.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

The Obamacare plan was proposed by conservative republicans in the 1990s in opposition to socialized medicine (hillarycare). So now 20 years later it's unacceptable to conservatives???

I don't get it. First they wanted free market healthcare. Which obamacare has regulations like the mandate. But overall it's a buying of health insurance and letting the market dictate costs. It doesn't seem to be working?

Why? Because healthcare can't be priced. Healthcare shouldn't be for those who can afford it. It's a right not a privilege. But allowing insurance companies to make profits off of people's health is the reason why it doesn't work and will never work to have a free market healthcare.

Because no one wants to be told you need to die, you can't afford it. It's too expensive.

There's a reason every other country uses a socialized plan and are able to buy extra coverage. And there is also a reason why the US is the most expensive healthcare in the world. And the BS about cutting edge. Cutting edge is falling off because we aren't investing in research. NIH is getting less money to give less grants = less research. Companies doing research are also getting less money for SBA grants and while private equity funding is okay now wait until the next recession.

it's expensive to develop drugs and technology. But the US has in place patents and lots of other price controls to make sure it's extra profitable compared to the rest of the countries whose governments negotiate set drug and device costs.

So I find it incredibly ironic that the Republicans who once proposed obamacare now reject it. And the GWB is the president who pushed through part D.

[StormRichards]

Lawyer: 'Appalled' by FBI warrant that shook Clinton

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/lawyer-appalled-by-fbi-warrant-that-shook-clinton/ar-BBxnnQ8?li=BBnb7Kz

[StormRichards]

Kellyanne Conway, ‘Trump Whisperer,’ Will Be Counselor to President

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kellyanne-conway-%E2%80%98trump-whisperer%E2%80%99-will-be-counselor-to-president/ar-BBxrxCL?li=BBnb7Kz

[StormRichards]

Ivanka Trump, children harassed on JetBlue flight: report

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ivanka-trump-children-harassed-on-jetblue-flight-report/ar-BBxseBW

The a-hole even boasted about harassing Ivanka and her family on Twitter.

Ivanka handled this better than I would have. I try to be polite and respectful to everyone I encounter, regardless if their views differ than mine. But do not verbally harass me in front of my children!

[StormRichards]

USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll - Democrat 2020

62% would prefer Hillary not run again. 66% want someone entirely new.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/theres-a-clear-democratic-front-runner-for-2020/ar-BBxq70O?li=BBnb7Kz

[Mjenn]

Ok, so since there is a mix of Trump supporters here I'm going to ask how you envision the return of jobs to America.

Because right now Trump and his daughter's companies both do a majority of their production outside the US in terms of making clothing.

Let's say they bring these jobs back to the US. And other companies follow suit.

Is the idea that these jobs will pay a livable wage? And by that I mean that employees will be able to afford a place to live and health insurance? As well as food? Is the idea that these will be low paying jobs? Part-time?

How will prices of goods not go up if production costs go up? Can we have cheap goods like we have now with all production in the US?

Will the same thing be true if companies make products in the US but use goods purchased from other countries? Does everything need to be made in the US? Because cotton is expensive and hard to come by, many jobs in the US are making quality goods with fabrics and products bought from other countries and sold at a premium. These goods are already more expensive due to the higher production cost, but this will push prices up even more.

Are Americans willing to pay more for everything in the US? How does Trump and Republicans envision an American economy where production returns?

Also what does this mean for the digital economy. Are Apps created in other countries more expensive in the US? Software?

[disneysteve]

I'm going to ask how you envision the return of jobs to America.

Unskilled and minimally skilled production jobs are never going to return to the US. It just isn't going to happen. Plus, unemployment is very low right now so where would all of these production workers come from anyway?

Cheap goods (dollar stores, WalMart, Target, etc.) would disappear if manufacturing came back to the US because our wages are far higher, even our minimum wage. Prices for everything would go up.

Sorry folks, but we live in a global economy. That isn't going away. US companies will source things from all over the world. Foreign companies will source things from all over the world.

[Singuy]

Trump's promise is nothing more than to get frustrated people's vote. He personally negotiated with Carrier and still can't keep them moving a larger bulk of the jobs to Mexico. Even with a 30% tax, the goods would STILL be cheaper to outsource to Mexico than to spend millions on American workers. Also I'm not sure what Trump is trying to do..have our tax dollars subsidize companies preventing them from moving their jobs? I rather my tax dollars be spent on converting low skilled workers into high skilled workers.

American workers are extremely expensive (wages, insurance, incentives, unions, HR)...and that's why companies are being punished (low profit margins) for keeping low skilled workers domestically. Low skill workers just can't compete with a robot who never calls out sick or some poor soul in India who will work while being sick because they need clean water.


Republicans, if you want the free market to work and have less government intervention..then stop this pipe dream about having the government punish companies that outsource. This is exactly the opposite of what you believe in.

[StormRichards]

As Democrats ponder their future, Biden makes a plea for a focus on the middle class

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/as-democrats-ponder-their-future-biden-makes-a-plea-for-a-focus-on-the-middle-class/ar-BBxv4XA?li=BBnb7Kz

Biden's thoughts while watching a pre-election Trump rally
"They're all the people I grew up with. They're their kids. And they're not racist. They're not sexist. But we didn't talk to them."

Biden's thoughts after speaking at a Hillary rally
"You didn't see any Hillary signs," Biden recalled. "Every time I talked about Hillary they listened. But ... "