Writes Josh Marshall, in "A Quick Take on Team Cave's Big Win."
Nobyembre 10, 2025
"This is an embarrassing deal, a deal to basically settle for nothing. It’s particularly galling..."
"... since it comes only days after Democrats crushed Republicans in races across the country. Election Day not only showed that Democrats had payed [sic] no price for the shutdown. It also confirmed the already abundant evidence that it has been deeply damaging for Donald Trump. But even with all this, I think the overall situation and outcome is basically fine [because]... Democrats fought. They held out for 40 days.... And that’s a big deal... It’s a big change in the direction of the fight we need in the years to come that just didn’t go far enough. Yet."
Mga Post
155 komento:
"It also confirmed the already abundant evidence that it has been deeply damaging for Donald Trump."
The Left will hate Trump no matter what. There's no "abundant evidence" that the majority of Americans - and especially Republicans - that Trump was damaged by the shutdown.
The Press is so, so biased.
Has he worked out his pornhub fetish yet
Josh Marshall.. LOL
it comes only days after Democrats crushed Republicans in races across the country.
When you come across something that seems inconsistent, check your assumptions. Democrats barely beat Republicans in blue areas. The NYC mayoral race was essentially between two Democrats. Only in Virginia were Republicans beaten and had Democrats not prolonged the shutdown to use as a wedge (with major media covering for them); Democrats likely would have lost Virginia. The shutdown gave Democrats press coverage to GOTV during an otherwise off cycle election.
"confirmed the already abundant evidence" Which he of course neglects to present.
Democrats held everyone hostage with their horrible lie-filled demands.
that's the truth.
Media - corrupt Soviet D's-- will never tell the truth.
Only in Virginia were Republicans beaten and had Democrats not prolonged the shutdown to use as a wedge (with major media covering for them); Democrats likely would have lost Virginia.
What you say about New Jersey and New York is true, and it was folly to expect a different outcome in an off-year election in those true-blue strongholds with the Republicans in charge of Washington.
I disagree about the shutdown leading to the victory of the deep-state CIA plant in Virginia. Shutdown or no shutdown, the Beltway parasites are boiling mad about their broken rice bowls. At the margins, furloughed government employees may have helped pad the margin of victory with get-out-the-vote efforts, but they and their corrupt cronies in the military-industrial-espionage-insurance-pharma-NGO octopus were always guaranteed to turn out in massive numbers to start the process of refilling the Democrat hog-trough from which they gorge themselves.
Baghdad Bob level bad take
It’s comforting to see that the so-called “thought leaders” of my political opponents are so tone-deaf and brain dead. I suppose Theres a chance this idiot actually believes what he wrote.
How many air travelers should they strand for how long next time, Josh?
Man that chap is really putting a lot of emphasis on Democrats winning in Democrat States that traditionally vote Democrat and surprised no one by voting Democrat this time. Literally every poll said it would be so. But, stick with me, the Senate Democrats were out on an Obamacare limb and had handed the saw to Trump.
The time to deal was earlier but later is better than never.
De Nile is not just a river in Egypt.
So, the Democrats settled for essentially nothing, but it is still a win. Do I have that right?
It's one of the main reasons I remain an avid golfer.
The big win was that the Democrats fought for 40 days? That’s a tablespoon of copium right there.
Hey bozo--who caved? You've got a bit more
'splaining to do.
Yes you do in fact have that right Old and Slow. Watching them enmythify this episode and demonstrate the folly of polishing a turd, even s really hard one, is fairly entertaining and should provide several laughs until I shut out the world and watch the Packers struggle to a win over the Eagles.
""This is an embarrassing deal, a deal to basically settle for nothing."
The democrats "got nothing" for funding the government. Jeez.
What a bullshit statement. The Democrats did not perform spectularly. They won a few seats in entirely predictable Democrat strongholds.
Democrats “crush” Republicans in blue states? Man bites dog. Democrats elected an Islamic communist, a tranny bathroom facilitator and an infanticide endorser and passed a proposition to disenfranchise Republicans in California. If Republicans weren’t so dense, this would be a PR advantage worth exploiting. Democrats are exactly who we think they are.
There is a question of motivating low propensity voters but those that slashed their own throats with double knives well you can do nothing for them
There were lossrs in mississippi as well as georgja
Witll harmeet challenge the california slate
On what planet is electing a Jew hating communist to govern NYC a big win?
‘Reading out the figures in a shrill, rapid voice, he proved to them in detail that they had more oats, more hay, more turnips than they had had in Jones’s day…’
— Squealer
Beasts of England, Beasts of Ireland,
Beasts of every land and clime…
On earth 846
Best way to tell the GOP and Trump won is the hysteria 9n the Democrat side
Actually, Virginia is a blue state that is swinging red. The Democrats won -- this time -- thanks to the GOP's unspectacular candidate choices. But for the second election running, they closed the gap between the two parties. 51.2% is nothing to brag about.
Neither is an Attorney General who wrote about assassinating his opponent. Own it: you are the Party of political murderers. How would you feel if they were talking about killing your own children? Would you still vote for them, you pathetic, disgusting people? Did you?
I'd like to see one person who voted for Jay Jones, who fantasized about murdering his opponent on social media, have the cahones to use his or her real name to justify choosing to vote in an AG who wants to kill his political opponent. Anyone? Anyone? You all own it now.
40 days. Very Biblical.
For those of you who didn’t even notice the government was “shutdown “ you are the true Americans. Yeah, travel can get complicated, but that’s part of the fun.
Starving poor democrats will get their SNAP benefits restored with the deal, Commie wing of the party furious.
Narciso: Georgia is purple turning blue. Demographics and a truly fucked up leftitarian GOP are to blame.
Seems like a lot of folks forget what this fight is about- tho loss of healthcare subsidies. Republicans have been a hard no.
So yes, Dems may have lost this short-term battle, but the next fight over ACA subsidies could be the real war. With the CR only lasting through January, Republicans now face a choice: honor their promise to either bring the extension to the floor—which they may not do—or vote it down. If they fail or reject it, roughly 24 million Americans will see a spike in premiums and around half of those shut out completely, making the consequences very tangible and visible.
So while this CR might look like a compromise, the upcoming debates and votes might just be where the rubber meets the road, shifting public attention and political leverage significantly. In a way, the short-term “loss” might set the stage for a larger, more consequential fight over healthcare.
"Settle for nothing"...hmmm....
The members of a Party that loves to spend, spend, spend projected their worst nightmare (no more spending) on their personal devil (Donald Trump). When this tantrum resulted in the unwanted nightmare coming true (no salaries, no air travel, no grant money for their friends), a few sane people accepted that they never had any leverage.
Denial is the first stage of grief in the Kubler-Ross model. The Democrats have alternated between denial and anger since 2016. I don't think they have the attention span to ever get to bargaining, depression, or acceptance.
Stay angry. Die angry. Feel noble. That is what they "settled" for.
Well i focused on the public service commission seats which will make things more expensive
If people are not motivated to vote they will end up in a worldof hurt
Naw their stark raving mad last time tank abrams well got nowhere but she did help steal 2020
I still couldnt find out which school board seats were in play fulton forsyth et al
Democrazys dissemble with SNAP judgments.
@Ronald J. Ward: "If they fail or reject it, roughly 24 million Americans will see a spike in premiums and around half of those shut out completely, making the consequences very tangible and visible."
Versus the invisible but identical consequences of shifting medical costs to the national debt and deficit? There is no free lunch in healthcare. However, there are some extremely powerful insurance and medical lobbyists who love the profit skimming enabled by government intervention. See Nancy Pelosi and her $280M portfolio. Check out her husband's occupation.
They are working really hard on the Republicans crushed angle.
It is really interesting that nobody is paying attention to the real story which is Ben Shapiro and the AIPAC lobby actually getting crushed.
“A loss is a win” reminds me of what the GOP sounded like before Trump. What Trump did for the GOP.
’So yes, Dems may have lost this short-term battle, but the next fight over ACA subsidies could be the real war.’
And the public will be reminded that the Dems only extended those subsidies for three years in 2022, and that the Dem-enacted fantasy of ‘affordable’ healthcare yielded premiums that are absurdly unaffordable. Good luck with that!!
Enigma, I’m not weighing in on policy here—just strategy. The point is that Republicans are now in a tough political spot: either put the ACA subsidy extension on the floor or risk millions of Americans facing skyrocketing premiums. The consequences are very visible and immediate for voters, which creates leverage.
The “cost-shift to the national debt” argument exists, but it’s abstract for most people. Visible consequences—higher premiums, loss of coverage—hit voters directly. From a strategic standpoint, that’s what Democrats can highlight in the weeks ahead to shape the narrative.
Little Josh Marshall can't afford enough polish for that turd he is buffing up.
Maybe Ronald W. can gift Marshall some polish.
TPM: The Blue Jays were the real winners.
About those lost healthcare subsidies. Democrats voted unanimously, without any Republican support, to sunset those subsidies. Democrats assured everyone that after a decade, health care would be so much more efficient and cheaper that the subsidies to the health insurers (not the insured) would be unnecessary. The Democrats Affordable Care Act has turned out not to be affordable as Democrats claimed, and people didn't get to keep their doctors either. Rather than take responsibility, Democrats now blame Republicans, who said all along this wasn't affordable.
Since 2013 insurance rates have gone up 50&
Marshall is clear about what he wants: " keep purging all the folks who can’t get with the new program. If a senator is from a comfortably Blue State and wasn’t vocally in favor of fighting this out, primary them — toss them overboard. " He claims that teh Dems own the affordability issue because they push for more and more subsidies -- translation, free stuff -- and should keep on pushing. That's the Mamdani deal for NYC, and it's a deal that neither NYC nor the country can afford. What it means is higher taxes to buy bigger bureaucracies delivering the same level of wonderfully efficient services we all associate with the government. Nothing about this will do anything to make the cost of living in places like NYC go down. Quite the opposite. Stay tuned (not that you have any choice in the matter).
Hassayamper and Tina; please understand that in regards to Virginia; I fully accept your arguments, but it really is the only exception to what was otherwise Democrats winning deep blue Democrat areas. I could even argue that the Democrat establishment actually lost most of those races to the radical fringe of their party. A fringe that when you look at national polling is on the 20 side of 80/20 issues. A fringe that is mad today because not enough Americans are continuing to suffer under the shutdown they wanted to happen. And mad because their minority views on policy are accepted by the majority.
Beast and Leland, rising premiums predates ACA but what your instructed playbook page omits is that ACA slowed those hikes for years. But when the mandate was dropped under Trump, a lot of younger and healthier folks left the insurance pool. That’s when premiums really jumped. The idea behind the mandate wasn’t to punish anyone, but to keep prices stable by balancing the risk. Without it, costs for those who remained (especially older or less healthy people) went up fast.
And now when something happens to these freeloaders, taxpayers get stuck with the tab.
Thanks a lot Trump!
Obamacare was a Republican idea that the Republicans DROPPED because they concluded it was a terrible idea.
The Democrats adopted it and forced it through because they cynically thought they'd bring along enough Republicans to make it "bipartisan with broad support." The next PLANNED step after Obamacare/ACA failed (they knew it would fail) was UK-style government-managed "single payer" healthcare.
Just like a good dope pusher, give away street drugs to get people started, and then charge more money once they are addicted. It works for drugs, it works for government handouts of all types. The main outcome is that power becomes ever more concentrated in the hands of the cartels/dealers (government).
Its regretable that they have to relearn the lesson of 2017 when the dems put that hack in
The rapist hack who wanted to butcher children (northam) add the psycho jay jones to the mix
Tammy Baldwin: "A wink and a nod to deal with this health care crisis later – with no actual guarantees – is just not enough for me or the Wisconsin families I work for," Baldwin said in a statement Sunday night. "The clock is up, families are shopping for insurance now, and I refuse to sign off on a deal that doesn’t lower working families’ health care costs."
Of course this idiot voted for the ACA, and the temporary subsidy extension.
Zelda had long since removed all doubt
It's embarrassing to see Republicans rationalize what happened last week. They didn't just lose in a some deep blue places. Dems wiped the floor with them in those deep blue places, even in races that were supposed to be competitive. (In NYC, with Dems divided between 2 candidates, the Rep finished a distant 3rd!)
Dems also won in GA, MS, and PA.
The reality is, Republicans don't do well when Trump is not on the ballot and Trump won't be on any more ballots. This spin is just whistling past the graveyard.
"The idea behind the mandate wasn’t to punish anyone, but to keep prices stable by balancing the risk."
I am sure you believe that, R.W. I was one of those who was mandated to buy insurance that complied with the ACA. After I retired in 2011, I had bought catastrophic coverage that protected me against bankrupting medical events- it was cheap and did exactly what it was I required. When the mandate came into effect, it raised my out of pocket costs by almost 500% if I had complied. I didn't comply because it was definitely an attempt to all but punish people like me- sure, idiots like you can reason away the fact that I was going to be forced to subsidize the insurance for people a lot less healthy than I was and am. When I reached age 54, I decided it made sense to restructure my finances so that I could take full advantage of Obamacare subsidies, and thus have sucked like a leech $60K out of the program the last 5 years- of course, all of that goes to the insurance company. So, thank you, Ronald, for helping to pay for my insurance through your taxes- remember, I am not punishing you- I am taking the money to help stabilize prices for other people.
You answered your own question now dems have cut theif own throats letting rapists perverts and other vermin on the loose
Nothing means that SNAP will be funded, school lunches will not be redistributed, salaries will be paid, air traffic will resume safely at full throttle, etc.
’Beast and Leland, rising premiums predates ACA but what your instructed playbook page omits is that ACA slowed those hikes for years.’
lol. Slowed the hike because young people who are far less likely to need insurance coverage were forced by law to participate in a scheme that transferred to them the financial burdens.
"The reality is, Republicans don't do well when Trump is not on the ballot and Trump won't be on any more ballots. This spin is just whistling past the graveyard."
This is a hard truth. Off ballot, Trump can pull some Senate candidates in purplish/reddish states over the line (see 2018), but he had little effect in increasing turnout/vote for House and state candidates. I don't know if anyone can take the mantle of Trump in 2028- Vance is the best shot and he is trying but the GOP hasn't really learned very much in the last decade and the demographics still favor the Dems going forward.
Lower medical financing costs, increase economic costs, and all without improving health.
Seriously, lots of self-proclaimed Republicans still really believe that the party would have beat Hillary in 2016 with Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz. If not for Trump, the Dems would have held the White House from 2009 until, at least, this January.
Well many possums retired in 2018, the redistricting fight masterminded by elias had some effect
’I had bought catastrophic coverage that protected me against bankrupting medical events - it was cheap and did exactly what it was I required.’
I always carried a $10k deductible policy and self-insured the rest. Back in the day that’s what health insurance was - major medical. And that’s what it should be today.
I disagree that the democrats got nothing out of the shutdown. While the outcome of the Virginia governor's race was never really in doubt, the anger generated by shutdown dragged Jay Jones, the attorney general candidate with murderous thought, over the finish line.
The AG's support is crucial to the democrats attempt to amend the Virginia constitution, redraw congressional district lines, and eliminate four republican representatives.
the demographics still favor the Dems going forward.
No they don't, as long as we can hold the line on immigration. Democrats have little more than half the number of children as Republicans. They are dying, and only vote fraud gives the Democrats a last gasp of viability at the national level.
We will outbreed them, and destroy them.
Josh Marshall turned me into a Republican, and I never got better.
Yes they indulge that delusion
We can challenge those seats too
"I always carried a $10k deductible policy and self-insured the rest. Back in the day that’s what health insurance was - major medical. And that’s what it should be today."
+1000
the anger generated by shutdown dragged Jay Jones, the attorney general candidate with murderous thought, over the finish line.
This election sucked for the people of Virginia and New York City, but felicitously, the murderous scumbag Jones and the communist scumbag Mamdani will be the highly publicized running-mates of every Democrat in the nation for the next twenty years.
Effing democrats. Couldn’t care less the damage they did to Americans. As usual with democrats it is all about power. Every damn time.
"No they don't, as long as we can hold the line on immigration. Democrats have little more than half the number of children as Republicans. They are dying, and only vote fraud gives the Democrats a last gasp of viability at the national level."
Then, you had better hope the Dems don't win the White House, House, and Senate trifecta ever again- because, if they do, there will be at least 4 new permanent Dem Senate seats, 5-7 new Dem SCOTUS members, 2-5 million new immigrants/year, and 100% mail-in-voting without ID- and anyone who complains about it gets put in a gulag.
And the tranny thing has about run its course. The Democrats' desire to mutilate and sterilize mentally ill children and allow perverted male sex pests to jack off in every womens' locker room will crush them everywhere outside a few deep-blue shitholes.
Then, you had better hope the Dems don't win the White House, House, and Senate trifecta ever again- because, if they do, there will be at least 4 new permanent Dem Senate seats, 5-7 new Dem SCOTUS members, 2-5 million new immigrants/year, and 100% mail-in-voting without ID- and anyone who complains about it gets put in a gulag.
Down that road lies guaranteed civil war.
Trump’s approval rating has tanked and Republicans suffered heavy losses in last week’s elections. There’s never been a better time for Senate Democrats to cave on the ACA extension.
They will bring back the madness rest assured in virginia and new jersey
There is a third alternative to the subsidize Obama Care or not options, i.e., replace Obama Care with something that actually works. Elon Musk pointed out that direct payments to users (e.g., Health Saving Accounts) without first passing money through the insurance lobby is one option. IOW, let individuals make their own insurance decisions without paying a middleman to basically skim the pass-through subsidies from the government. The real problem with the ACA is that it can never be solvent without some fundamental changes to the program. You may recall that that was the gist of the Republicans' argument when the ACA was passed without a single Republican affirmative vote.
Slowed the hike because young people who are far less likely to need insurance coverage were forced by law to participate in a scheme that transferred to them the financial burdens.
Burdens for which they had yet to achieve an income level to take on. Of course, it helps to have BLS completely change the way healthcare increases reflect against the CPI, so that you can both claim a smaller inflation increase at the time and overall claim that insurance premiums were held. The reality is BLS chose, during the Biden Administration, not to recalculate previous years using their new CPI formula, because they knew the results would look bad for them. They chose to lie to the American people.
"There is a third alternative to the subsidize Obama Care or not options, i.e., replace Obama Care with something that actually works. Elon Musk pointed out that direct payments to users (e.g., Health Saving Accounts) without first passing money through the insurance lobby is one option."
While such a plan would hugely benefit someone like me- it would have netted me almost $16,000 next year minus the costs of my one prescription drug which would only be $100/year at Walmart (an ACE inhibitor for blood pressure management), that leads me to conclude such a plan would never actually work outside of enriching people like me. However cynical I am about the entire matter, I do believe the $15,000 sent to the insurance company this past year does make the insurance for someone, poorer and less healthy than I am, affordable.
Put down the bong Kaki. You sound delusional.
The issues are, first, price and health, second is financing, whether through insurance for catastrophiccoverage, pooled funds to reduce person risk untaxed layaways, etc.
’Burdens for which they had yet to achieve an income level to take on. Of course, it helps to have BLS completely change the way healthcare increases reflect against the CPI, so that you can both claim a smaller inflation increase at the time and overall claim that insurance premiums were held.’
Indeed, but don’t tell Ron about that ‘playbook page’…
Kak smokin’ teh Lamb’s Bread, mon.
"rehajm said...
Baghdad Bob level bad take"
Sorry Infidel, my takes are nonpareil. I will abscond with your wife as your intestines roast in Hell.
The lone coyote kak howls and whines in the desert 🌵
I always carried a $10k deductible policy and self-insured the rest. Back in the day that’s what health insurance was - major medical. And that’s what it should be today.
That would solve a lot of problems, but there's always going to be the issue of 5- and 6-figure bills for care in the last year of life, or for new drugs, where decisions have to be made about what insurance will cover. It's probably hard for an insurance plan even to spell that out in advance. But that's where a big part of the expense is.
Everyone must now thank the Republicans for opening up the government as we were all told only they could do.
’That would solve a lot of problems, but there's always going to be the issue of 5- and 6-figure bills for care in the last year of life, or for new drugs, where decisions have to be made about what insurance will cover.’
Agreed, but I think a solution can be found that would be a lot less destructive than the ACA boondoggle.
let individuals make their own insurance decisions without paying a middleman to basically skim the pass-through subsidies from the government.
Two middlemen, actually. Government employees and insurance companies. Either of them can probably defeat any attempt at meaningful reform. Together they are unbeatable.
I have always been lukewarm on the ACA structure, because it is functionally a 10% tax on my income with no carryover benefit from one year to the next.
I would get a much better return on my taxes and payments if we just ditched the whole (bleeping) system and expanded the public Medicare program to cover everyone.
Of course that is not happening, because the "moderates" in the Senate all benefit from propping up the health insurance industry. You might also be interested to know that the Senate Democrats involved in this are also some of the most enthusiastic supporters of Israel. So effectively, Trump and the Republicans undercutting these politicians within the Democratic Party. That is OK with me.
Trump and the Republicans response to this issue is to effectively let private companies loot and steal and bankrupt the rest of us.
After I retired in 2011, I had bought catastrophic coverage that protected me against bankrupting medical events- it was cheap and did exactly what it was I required.
What was the lifetime cap on that catastrophic insurance? Did you ever have to use it? Because if you did, I bet you would discover that it didn't cover everything you thought it did. (One of the easiest dodges was for the insurance company to reject your claim because of "preexisting conditions")
I Am Leah
@Bossy_Leah
All of the Democrats who called it a “Republican shutdown” seem pretty mad that 8 Democrats voted to open the government.
"I always carried a $10k deductible policy and self-insured the rest. Back in the day that’s what health insurance was - major medical. And that’s what it should be today."
+1000
yes!
THE LEFT HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT INSURANCE IS FOR.
the left demand single payer. It's Fascist.
We should all have the freedom to shop for the insurance we need - without a corrupt government liar - forcing us into a lie.
That would solve a lot of problems, but there's always going to be the issue of 5- and 6-figure bills for care in the last year of life.
Just going into assisted living is well over a 100K a year. You are dreaming if you think a year of hospitalization or even hospice will be covered by "5-figures". Three years of assisted living (including 2 in memory care) cost my mother-in-law well over $1 million out of pocket and doesn't even include the Medicare coverage.
’What was the lifetime cap on that catastrophic insurance? Did you ever have to use it?’
Are you saying there shouldn’t be a lifetime cap?
Hating Trump is a sickness, not a political policy position. And without the Media Fictions that sickness makes this author look terminal.
’Just going into assisted living is well over a 100K a year.’
I’m old enough to remember when assisted living was a luxury out of reach for almost everyone. The taxpayers certainly can’t afford such a Cloward-Piven healthcare folly.
there's always going to be the issue of 5- and 6-figure bills for care in the last year of life, or for new drugs, where decisions have to be made about what insurance will cover.
Of course there is.
The proper role of government is to do what individuals cannot reasonably be expected to do for themselves, and to refrain from doing anything that they can and should do for themselves.
Ruinous medical bills after an accident or major illness are one of those things that can and should be covered. Routine trips to the doctor for sniffles or hemorrhoids or ankle sprains are not.
The systems in Switzerland and Singapore are extremely successful and popular, and avoid the rationing and endless waiting endemic to national health services as in Britain or Canada. I don't know the full details, but I'm told they work roughly as follows:
- Everyone has a private health savings account, into which a fixed percentage of their income is transferred when taxes are paid, and to which tax-favored contributions from employers are also strongly incentivized.
- All health care expenditures are paid out of the HSA until it is exhausted. Doctors and hospitals must post their prices and compete for business.
- HSA money not used in one year rolls over to the next, and can be used for general retirement expenses after a certain age, so patients are incentivized to shop around and avoid fruitless or wasteful treatment.
- Destitute, disabled, or retired individuals receive the money that would otherwise have been spent on programs like Medicare and Medicaid directly into their HSA, and follow the same rules as everyone else.
- Once the HSA is exhausted, then government picks up 100% of the medical tab for the remainder of the year. Everything begins anew the following year.
This would cut expenditures by a solid 50% and cover 100% of the public.
It would cost many jobs for government functionaries, insurance clerks, and so forth. The government workers' unions and major insurance companies would fight it like grim death.
It will never happen unless there is a president like Trump who is a bold riverboat gambler at heart, with something other than spineless seat-warming RINO jellyfish in Congress. Perhaps it will never happen until there is a complete financial collapse or a civil war to sweep away the deadwood and break all the rice-bowls and hog-troughs and gravy-trains government has erected.
The dems seem to be telling themselves that they're poised to reap the benefits of forcing the GOP to oppose ACA subsidies. But it's pretty apparent that ACA has only raised the cost of HC and insurance, and many of the people receiving the subsidies are relatively affluent folks who are simply gaming the system. Maybe the dems are right that they can gaslight the country into thinking ACA is wonderful and reforming it would be a death sentence for tens of millions of Americans (or some such preposterous claim), but my feeling about it is that maybe we need to have the debate on this that the dems seem to be itching for.
It's interesting -- although sad -- that most dem commenters only seem to be focused on how an issue may affect election results, and never about a policy's actual real-world consequences apart from politics.
“… already abundant evidence that it has been deeply damaging for Donald Trump.” It was interesting that a few of the leftmediaswine actually challenged Democrats who were blaming Trump/Republicans. Not a trend, but a few.
’Perhaps it will never happen until there is a complete financial collapse or a civil war to sweep away the deadwood and break all the rice-bowls and hog-troughs and gravy-trains government has erected.’
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :)
Is TDS covered? It's far more widespread and debilitating than most illnesses. Even just witnessing someone else suffer with it is heartbreaking.
It's pretty frustrating trying to convince people blinded by partisanship that the total failure of Obamacare to fulfill any of it's promises while dramatically increasing costs is a bad thing, or to even get them to remember who designed and passed the disaster.
"...But it's pretty apparent that ACA has only raised the cost of HC and insurance, and many of the people receiving the subsidies are relatively affluent folks who are simply gaming the system. ...."
Don't know what you do for insurance, but when the ACA marketplace offers one insurer for your zip code, and the only affordable policy is a POS HMO with a $14K deductible at $1000 per month per person, and that's with the subsidy, that's basically a losing game whatever your income bracket is. The problem is the ACA, not affluent people.
I suppose for your average coastal elite "journalist," New York/New Jersey/Virginia counts as "across the country."
Once the HSA is exhausted, then government picks up 100% of the medical tab for the remainder of the year. Everything begins anew the following year.
Sounds like a good plan, but do you really think Republicans would support such a plan?
You forgot to mention that strict government control of the healthcare system (from insurance prices to drug costs to what doctors and hospitals can charge). You all always seem to leave that part out.
The savings you cite (50%) are just pulled out of your ass.
So are republicans still working on the "concept of a plan" since 2012? Anybody seen anything from the REDS YET? I LOVE my Medicare Advantage program better than my $1800 a month job insurance when I worked decades ago and even that was almost 20 years ago.. REDS gotta come up with something soon right? My grandkids and great grandkids will wait!!! you guys are hillarious!
Hard to think a Dem win in NY or urban VA, or NYC, demonstrates "loss" to Trump administration. I've friends in DC VA suburbs who would vote for a literal Dem Party dog rather than a qualified moderate Republican candidate. In Chicago, voters have elected dead Dem Party candidates rather than Republican or Independent candidates.
Last week's elections may be last hurrah for Dem Party to field successful election candidates. If Mamdani's NYC term implodes, as city services deteriorate further and more rich folks keep their city income tax dollars by relocating out of NYC, likely even out-of-state, wait for the anguish and gnashing teeth from national Dem Party leaders....leaders? who are the current Dem Party leaders anyways - Bernie and AOC and Hakeem??
The savings you cite (50%) are just pulled out of your ass.
You're right, Freder. They were. Turns out the savings are likely to be even greater than that.
I checked, and Singapore, with a modern first-world medical system comparable to our own, has expenditures of $4,350 per year, adjusted for purchasing-power parity. In the US the figure is $13,492.
Singapore beats the US medical system on almost every metric: infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy, and more. Even waiting times for surgery, as there is no such thing as insurance pre-qualification.
The only noteworthy advantage of the American medical system is a modest edge in 5-year cancer survival, 66% versus 62%. Even this might be an artifact of lead-time bias due to more use of high-tech screening protocols.
Why would the minority party think that they are in a position to demand concessions? It seems like the party in charge is the one which should get concessions.
You forgot to mention that strict government control of the healthcare system (from insurance prices to drug costs to what doctors and hospitals can charge).
No I didn't. You're as ignorant as ever.
Singapore does buy medications in bulk and sells them at subsidized costs in public hospitals and other public institutions, but in the private fee-for-service environment their prices are unregulated except for requiring transparent publication of the costs.
Likewise, physicians' fees are unregulated but must be publicly posted, unless they work in a government hospital, in which case they are set by the government in negotiation with the doctors' union.
Public hospitals are subsidized; private hospitals can charge anything they like as long as they publish the fee schedule.
"Once the HSA is exhausted, then government picks up 100% of the medical tab for the remainder of the year."
That doesn't address the issue of what is covered. Suppose there's a cancer drug that costs $100,000 per dose, and has been shown to increase the survival rate from 30% to 40% compared to a drug that costs $1000/dose. How is the decision made as to whether someone can be reimbursed for the more expensive drug?
It also confirmed the already abundant evidence that it has been deeply damaging for Donald Trump.
See, it's stuff like this that makes me laugh ... and also explains why people like Inga come by and peddle their shit thinking the rest of us will buy into it.
The reality-based community lives anywhere and everywhere outside of it.
Singapore beats the US medical system on almost every metric: infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy, and more. Even waiting times for surgery, as there is no such thing as insurance pre-qualification.
Like I said, it sounds like a good plan. I will be very happy when the Republicans propose such a plan. But I know they won't.
@Hassayamper: Singapore beats the US medical system on almost every metric: infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy, and more. Even waiting times for surgery, as there is no such thing as insurance pre-qualification.
Singapore is 75% ethnic Chinese. The US isn't an east Asian culture and will never have the same compliant and cooperative worker bees.
"Diversity is our strength" except when it comes to order, structure, and predictability. Compare the USA's struggling ethnic groups to their source cultures around the world. Consider that California mixes elite tech workers and scientists with drooling droolers who seek a woke Antifa hippie utopia.
Like sands through the hourglass, so are the daily media pieces designed to enrage the angry Left with just a dash of hope.
I will be very happy when the Republicans propose such a plan. But I know they won't.
I will be amused when the Democrats propose a plan to fix the plan which was meant to remedy the previous plan.
Just came across a Sean Davis warning that might help explain my take of a possible strategy of why Dems folded. Davis says;
“ I don’t know who is advising congressional Republicans on strategy right now, but it is whoever it is has an IQ barely approaching room temperature.
Republicans right now have no accomplishments, no plans, and no vision. Why on earth would anyone be excited to go vote for them 12 months right now?
Trump needs to ditch the foreign policy crap and focus all his attention on the domestic economy, which is still not working for the majority of people. Right now he looks weak and rudderless. Be mad all you want, but it’s the truth.
Newly minted college grads can’t find work and are saddled with debt. Where is their path to the American dream right now? Who is giving them a vision of a future worth fighting for?
You cannot have a viable country or future when half your country and all its young people are locked out of the economy and locked out of ever owning a home or much of anything beyond next month’s streaming subscription.
Does anyone in Washington care about this? Anyone at all?
Republicans had better wake up, because right now their nightmare is only beginning if they don’t start making massive changes.”
Nothing will be cheaper in January, imports will skyrocket, and the job market will still be hemorrhaging. Latinos will still likely be dropping Trump like a used condom. More Brown people will be going underground as masked goons will still be rounding up neighbors and co-workers, further driving up prices. The ugliness of the beautiful bill gets closer while 24 million see health care rise significantly or will be out of reach entirely.
And here’s the kicker- it’s all on Trump and Republicans. It’s incumbent on the to bring the ACA subsidies to the floor and fix it. Voters won’t care if Dems did this or that- it’s there Obamacare and they will want it now.
Some guy said some alarmist crazy shit, and I believe him, because I hope he's right.
Ron’s concern is duly noted.
The people who seemed the most angry that gov't programs weren't being funded now seem to be the most angry that gov't programs are being funded.
Trump needs to ditch the foreign policy crap and focus all his attention on the domestic economy
Those who can't see rebalancing the trade deficit, gaining trillions of dollars of investment in critical domestic industries, reshoring critical supply chains, and ending foreign wars with which the US populace might be entangled as "focusing his attention on the domestic economy" should be sharply examined to see if they are actually bots run by Trump's opponents.
Progressives would love for the Republicans to get bogged down in discussions of restricting the healthcare system.
Nothing would serve, or please, them more.
The Dems own healthcare. Do not take it off their hands.
and ending foreign wars
In the last couple weeks, Trump has threatened to go to war with both Venezuela (actually we might even be at war with them now) and Nigeria.
The left would be better-served to worry about their presidential prospects for ‘28. Let’s examine their stellar bench: Gavin, AOC, Harris, Mayor Pete, Pritzker and, perhaps, Bernie. On second thought, let’s not. lol
"You cannot have a viable country or future when half your country and all its young people are locked out of the economy and locked out of ever owning a home or much of anything beyond next month’s streaming subscription."
Good argument for free homes for everybody. No taxes or insurance required.
Or, maybe , put a cap on home prices per sq ft.
Or, make home ownership illegal.
Just spitballin' here.
I hope we can have a civil debate on health care. From what I've seen on this thread I doubt if that is possible. Simple example: Infant mortality rate comparisons. Drill into the data. What is included as an infant mortality in one country's data vs another country's? Apples and oranges. You are lying to each other if you don't drill down intHealthcare. And good data is extremely hard if not impossible to come by. The left is especially good at using this tactic. (Not that the right is not capable of using the same tactic.) If you don't consider the differences in reporting you aren't being truthful. You are not part of the solution. If you have to use corrupt data to make a point why should I consider your arguments as valid?
It's not a simple problem if the goal is to provide equality of outcome in healthcare. Why is that even the goal?
"Newly minted college grads can’t find work"
"More Brown people will be going underground as masked goons will still be rounding up neighbors and co-workers,"
Maybe the newly minted can lower themselves into the job vacated by the "Brown people"
In the run up to the 2024 election, unchecked, illegal immigration was a highly ranked problem. The left solution would have largely continues the flow of illegals. Trump said He'd fix it with restoration of his old EO's and enforcement. The Democrats responded by calling him a fascist/Hitler/racist. The guy that offered a solution won. And the solution worked.
In NYC, and elsewhere, affordability is a real concern for the young, stretching to the middle aged. Mandami offers solutions like rent control and more taxes (on the rich only, of course). The Republicans, and his Democrat opponents, respond by calling him a socialist and a communist. The guy offering a solution won.
Now I think any of Mamdani positions that he can implement will be counter productive.
But the point is Republicans need to identify the hot issues and offer solutions, not name calling.
All of the Democrats who called it a “Republican shutdown” seem pretty mad that 8 Democrats voted to open the government.
I don't understand why so many on the left are upset about SNAP benefits going out to feed the hungry. I admit all this was a waste of time, as these 8 Democrats could have voted on the CR over a month ago, but they finally did and isn't that a good thing?
’Good argument for free homes for everybody.’
That’s a great idea! We could call it the Affordable Home Act.
The Affordable Home Act is not fiction --- see HUD and the many public housing programs across the country. See HUD's history of demonizing landlords (slumlords), and Biden's numerous efforts to funnel free housing (and block evictions) for black and brown people.
"I have always been lukewarm on the ACA structure, because it is functionally a 10% tax on my income with no carryover benefit from one year to the next.
I would get a much better return on my taxes and payments if we just ditched the whole (bleeping) system and expanded the public Medicare program to cover everyone."
How much of a tax on your income would it be to fund Medicare for All, Kak? I see my mother's actual payments for Medicare, all parts, and it ain't free- it is a significant tax on her SS income, and that doesn't include the amounts she paid in payroll taxes over the years for the Part A which the "free" part of Medicare.
Simple example: Infant mortality rate comparisons. Drill into the data. What is included as an infant mortality in one country's data vs another country's? Apples and oranges. You are lying to each other if you don't drill down into healthcare. And good data is extremely hard if not impossible to come by. The left is especially good at using this tactic.
Good point. In America, when a 24-week premature baby is born, every effort is made to save it, and if these frequently-futile heroic measures fail, it is counted as a perinatal infant death. In most of the rest of the world, the infant is put in a broom closet to die, and subsequently is tallied as "stillborn", and does not enter the statistical data sets for perinatal mortality OR life expectancy at birth. So not only does our infant mortality artifactually go up by comparison to the sneering Eurotrash, our life expectancy goes down too.
Academia and organized medicine are perfectly aware of this phenomenon, but make no effort to correct the record, because they are leftist filth who hate America and wish to live under a one-party socialist state. They gleefully and diligently seek out and trumpet anything that can be twisted to make Europe look good and us look bad.
"What was the lifetime cap on that catastrophic insurance?"
The policies I bought had lifetime caps of $2 million dollars. They had $25,000/yr deductibles. They cost me about $200/month for the 3 years I bought them before they were eliminated by Obamacare. They covered no routine medical expenses of any kind- I had a GP who charged me $100 for a yearly checkup with about $50 for the routine bloodwork.
"Three years of assisted living (including 2 in memory care) cost my mother-in-law well over $1 million out of pocket and doesn't even include the Medicare coverage."
So, who should have had to pay that additional, non-Medicare, expenses for your mother-in-law who apparently had at least $1 million to spend on it? Look, you have my sympathy- my father really needed memory care his last 18 months alive but my parents didn't have the money for it- so my mother and I cared for him at home. Even if there were a government program that would have paid for it, we wouldn't have used it anyway for other reasons.
So, who should have had to pay that additional, non-Medicare, expenses for your mother-in-law who apparently had at least $1 million to spend on it?
You entirely missed the point of of my comment. I was merely using an example from real life that medical care is a hell of a lot more expensive than people think. And if you think an HSA and a catastrophic insurance policy that caps out at $3 million or so is all you need (assuming we are getting rid of all government funded healthcare), you are an idiot.
But since you asked. No, I don't think you should be down to your last penny (literally) before Medicaid kicks in.
Nothing will be cheaper in January, imports will skyrocket, and the job market will still be hemorrhaging. Latinos will still likely be dropping Trump like a used condom. More Brown people will be going underground as masked goons will still be rounding up neighbors and co-workers, further driving up prices. The ugliness of the beautiful bill gets closer while 24 million see health care rise significantly or will be out of reach entirely.
Yeah, I remember when all of that was said back in April. How's that workin' out for ya?
"And if you think an HSA and a catastrophic insurance policy that caps out at $3 million or so is all you need (assuming we are getting rid of all government funded healthcare), you are an idiot."
The idiot is you, Fredo- if it is typical that medical costs exceed even $500,000/person then literally no entity can afford to pay that, not even the government.
Seriously, Fredo, can you even do basic math?
I think the answer is self evident
Wow, so delusional. Democrats winning in deep blue areas is hardly a repudiation of Trump. The polls must have been awful in places they want to flip next year.
@Freder
Is your healthcare goal to make sure that all costs are affordable to everyone? If not what are they? Since you seem to be dissatisfied with the present system what would be your solution(s)? I know you are concerned about our national debt, please factor that into your solution.
Thanks for your response.
One thing I want to address before I close this thread tonight- I got the feeling in the some of the comments that people think the ACA subsidies enacted in 2010's bill are the ones that expired- that is categorically untrue- those had no sunset provision- they are permanent. What had a sunset that required renewal in appropriations are the additional subsidies added in 2021 that were related to the COVID "emergency". They were a relatively small part of the overall subsidy structure- my estimate on my own personal experience was it added about 10% to the subsidies I would have received under the older structure (i.e. my premium bill for the exact same plan from 2021 dropped by about 100 dollars the year following and would have jumped a 100 dollars this year if I had kept that plan.
Democrats ability to give up just at the moment they were beginning to get traction and in a manner that makes them look like it was all their fault is unparalleled. They are truly incompetent.
"Democrats ability to give up just at the moment they were beginning to get traction and in a manner that makes them look like it was all their fault is unparalleled. They are truly incompetent."
LOL. It was all their fault, Bich- no one is actually fooled by the claims that the GOP shut down the government- the proof is literally right there in the story- all it took was 8 Democrats changing their votes to vote with the GOP to reopen the government. I know logic is one of your weaknesses, so do you really believe the GOP shut down the government? Just a simple question, Bich- which party spent 40 days voting to reopen the government and which party spend 40 days voting to shut it down? This is a one word answer- so no essay.
Kakistocracy said...
Democrats ability to give up just at the moment they were beginning to get traction and in a manner that makes them look like it was all their fault is unparalleled. They are truly incompetent.
Do you wake up in the morning and think of ways to post things that make you look as stupid as possible?
The compromise allegedly mandates that any laid off workers be rehired and any furloughed workers given back pay. I’d be interested to see a con law professors thoughts on separation of powers issues from this deal. Presumably, the chief executive and other senior officials made decisions on how to run their offices at reduced or non-existent funding levels and cut personnel based on those decisions. What power does congress have when congress failed to appropriate money in the first place to now tell the executive branch to undo their personnel decisions and staff their offices with personnel that congress directs?
I’m wondering, if you are a democrat wouldn’t you want health benefits to go up right before the midterm elections with the Republicans in control?
Yancey: it must be nice to be in a position where you feel good about all the grifters paying $40 or $50 a month for what cost me $40 K that I didn't have last year and will cost more than half our salary this year, with no eyecare or dentistry.
I don't think you understand.
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.