The point of insurance is not to FORCE me to have to buy it. Before I could just opt out and put money away for medical. Now I can't.

"Obviously you missed the point that news organizations misrepresent stories as is evidenced by these bullshit numbers I made up.

Your correct, and sourced numbers from the congressional budget office aren't as good as my made up and unsourced numbers.

I'm not looking to further be called out on my bullshit, so if you reply, I will plug my ears and say, 'lalala'"

Poor people should make more money? Why didn't they think of that?

Honestly I'm giving your posts deeper consideration than they deserve, but you should know that a majority of people on Medicaid have jobs and nearly 8 out of 10 are at the very least, in working families.

Some jobs do not offer employer subsidized coverage, nor do they pay enough for employees to seek their own coverage. These are still jobs that society evidently wants done though. And since we are a nation that avails emergency care and live saving care to people, regardless of whether or not they can pay for it, not accounting for these people in some way is something of a public hazard, and certainly fiscally irresponsible.

Perhaps you're of the mindset that we should only be offer live saving care to those who first proofs that they can pay for it. If that's your stance, go ahead and say that. Really though, maybe don't participate in a thread about healthcare if it's a topic that disinterests you.

Poor people should try to make more money if they want to buy things. Yes, it's that simple. It's not society's problem or burden if they can't. What disinterests me is the narrative that they can't better themselves by trying harder and being smarter with their choices. What I propose would ultimately help them versus having a bunch of programs that will keep them poor by incentivising it if the benefits are too good which they often are. People in general are better off figuring out how to improve their situations versus becoming dependent on the government. 

Here's a vid that goes a bit into that. 

https://youtu.be/ZlsHNzp5SoM

There will always be a class of people who work jobs that don't offer ESI and don't pay enough for the employees to buy healthcare in the market.

The first world standard of care is simply cost prohitive to many working people.

We're either going to take care of these people, or we're not. No one wants to take the politically suicidal stance that we should refuse poor people treatement, but a certain contingent wants to cut coverage so that we can manufacture misery and medical bankrupticies. 

His draconian health care plan fucks over the middle class, too, knucklehead as does the taxes he wants to implement.

And BTW, the GOP earned their Greedy One Percent moniker because they're all about taking from the poor and middle class and giving to the rich. They don't give a single solitary fuck about the poor OR middle class, Trump is no exception.

My bad BTW, Kansas' economy is actually ranked third worst in the nation under Brownback's egregious tax cuts. The same tax cuts Trump wants to implement for the rest of the nation. Because it worked so well for Kansas.

It was so bad that even the GOP-controlled congress voted to not only repeal his bankrupting tax cuts, but override his veto on said tax repeal. 

And to answer your initial question, at least 15 mil of those 22 mil are at risk. The vast majority of the 22 mil losing their insurance have NOTHING AT ALL to do with the individual mandate, but rather, the Medcaid cuts Trump repeatedly promised he wouldn't touch.

@Bold That's ironic considering the 1% never get more in benefits than what they paid in taxes. If anything the 99% siphons off more from the 1% than vice versa but I guess that's where you don't see your own flawed logic ... 

What makes your ranking that you showed any better than the other indicators ? 

15 million less Medicaid enrollees =/= 15 million at risk for immediate medical attention ... 

The new plan is a lot more realistic, paying more for less benefits to be able to meet a more balanced budget. Americans should learn how to ration healthcare before liberals start comparing how the US does healthcare compared to the rest of the developed first world countries when subsized healthcare only works on a balanced budget when you cut benefits ... 

No, I didn't misunderstood anything from that post ...

He should've been the one to clarify but I guess that's what happens when you stay online too much and write low quality posts ... 

It's just fucking stupid to leave out information if you're trying to make your case clear ... 

What kind of surprises me is that people expect change? When I was a child I knew that USA was considered a big business with common people living it who were asking for help but businesses simply not care and since then wall Street got only more important, Universities became businesses, Schools, Hospitals, even prisons....if democracy fails to change it why people expect a solution? 

Why can't you guys just be happy for the rich people?