The other thread is discussing what happened and why it happened. I'm curious what you think is going to happen next.

Is the repeal of obamacare actually going to go through? If so, do you think they'll, at the same time, pass a replacement? If so, what will it look like?

Will we actually start burning all the coal again? I know !jobs! but the Republicans are just wrong on the environment. I'm not even talking about climate change, just the need to protect the environment for our immediate sake right now -- clean air, clean water, clean land, wilderness for our children to enjoy, etc.

What else?

.

I guess I'm most worried about what this means for inequality and externalities.

Perhaps my biggest question is, whether or not the Democrats make the right conclusions from the autopsy, or screw up again in four years.

I'm interested to see how much congressional Republicans fight him on his wilder stuff (like leaving NATO). Will they try and stop him? Or will they just fall in line like they did during the election?


I'd put money on "screw up again in four years" :saddowns:

I'm not sure Trump is so interested in his wilder claims himself. I am more interested in the converse: namely, to see how deeply Trump will abandon the interests of base, in favor of congressional Republicans on the take for the 1%.

I'm listening to the Mark Levin show right now, and he is more or less taking credit for "holding Trump's feet to the fire", forcing him to become a "true conservative", which more or less means being incredibly unyielding in pushing for tax cuts for the wealthy and rolling back environmental regulations. In other words, more of the same old "trickle down" economics and the complete denial of the existence of externalities. Which is very, very unfortunate.

In other words, another round of "let's tap into the anger caused by delirious effects of laissez faire economic policy"... in order to further increase profit margins for the energy sector and for the wealthiest beneficiaries of laissez faire policies. Sounds like a positive feedback loop to me, and talk radio has the base locked into it just long enough for another round of *n** rape.

In the best of all possible worlds, something goes badly for Trump, and the pendulum swings the other way in four years, and we see a more intellectually honest variation on the theme of "let's help poor rural voters" from a very different brand of Democrat which will have to rise from the ashes of the disaster that is the DNC.

I'm not holding my breath.

I didn't ever hear him say he wanted to leave NATO, only that he wanted everyone to "pay their fair share." (Which sounds like something the democrats normally say, no?)

Maybe I missed it, or maybe he initially said something crazy like "let's leave nato" and then later "clarified" his statement to mean "every member should pay their fair share" and everyone is focusing on the initial comment? The news was blowing up last night about what this meant for nato... but come on! There's no way anyone is that stupid that he'll just leave. Does he even have that power anyway?

I'm always worried when one party has control of the house, senate, and presidency. I think we should have built-in checks and balances against that. I say this every election year but winning by 1% or 5% does not make a "mandate." If "about 50%" of the population didn't vote for you, it's not a mandate!

On the contrary, our system appears to me to be too gridlocked, compared to a parliamentary system.

What seems more detrimental to me is that either party is intent on tearing down the policies of the other as soon as they take office, and that one party is intent on fulfilling the prophesy that government is dysfunctional by definition, which furthers the narrative that gridlock is somehow a good thing, while structural problems remain unsolved, and political donors reap a continuous profit the entire time.

Ultimately, the country might be ungovernable since the irreparable division caused by the Civil War, and that the faux sense of unity in the 20th century was only brought about as a result of great economic despair, and war. Which, according to Piketty, also conveniently demolished the old wealth, creating a new middle class and a booming economy.

On the other hand, when one party is fully in power, they will enact stuff that is in their interests only which is what causes the other party to want to undo everything the next chance they get. With 2 parties in power at least they have to somewhat agree to get anything done.

Oh look, I didn't see this previously (reading it now): https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf

Nobody, not even Trump, knows what he's going to do.

As much as I'd love to see term limits for congress, it will never happen because they would have to enact it. Why would they do that? It's up to the voters to vote out incumbents at the end of their term.

Neat.



I'm not sure it's feasible to even propose this.



Okay, but:

1.) US federal government offices are already short-staffed, and wait times are already stupid for absolutely everything. CBP/CIS, IRS, SSA, there aren't enough physical offices and they're all critically short-staffed. Dealing with any federal agency basically means you're spending most of a work day in a waiting room, instead of contributing to the economy. I won't argue that the US government doesn't need reform, because it does, but cutting line workers is not going to make dealing with the government any easier.

2.) Government workers are gonna get a whole lot worse. Normally, managers might fire poor workers, in order to replace them with better workers. Under a hiring freeze, though, they have no incentive to fire anybody; a mediocre worker is better than nothing. Worse, while good people will keep moving to the private sector, mediocre people are gonna cling to those government jobs like an effin golden ticket. You think this happens today? You have no idea what's coming.

3.) Maybe inter-agency outsourcing, as much as possible. Like tax evasion is a felony, right? Better lube up your butt, because Special Agent Johnson is doing your 2019 tax audit.



1.) What if it's a really big law, like PPACA. Could someone buy it by striking down two ancient regulations that are no longer enforced, or would they need to repeal something similarly big like the Patriot Act?

2.) Do the sponsors get to choose the laws? Could someone, for example, draft a poison bill that calls for a "binding affirmation and acknowledgement of the Jewish Holocaust during World War 2, and repudiation of Adolf Hitler's goals and methods", but then make that bill, upon its passing, strike down agriculture subsidies and the espionage act?

3.) What about Donald Trump's constitutional amendment, above. Does that count? Would they need to strike down two amendments first? (Probably the 13th and the 16th, am I right?)

Pretty sure that:

1.) The K-street revolving door isn't for officials, but for their non-official aides and advisors, who I think wouldn't be affected.

2.) Ousted congresspeople aren't so much hired to become lobbyists, they're given high-paid do-nothing jobs in return for favors they did while still in office. It's basically buying a congressman on layaway, and it's not going to be stopped by this kind of legislation.

I'm not sure who has been doing this.

Canada has been doing this. Oops.


I don't have time to do the rest right now. Lots of it is terribad. Some things I actually agree with though, like renegotiating NAFTA; I don't think anybody is happy with how it's turned out, and the Canadian Ambassador pretty much said so today.

By the way, Scott Adams's blog has been spooky this election.



12 hours later:

[quote=Canadian Ambassador]Obviously any trade deal can be improved, and to the degree that the president-elect of the United States wants to see improvements to NAFTA, we'd be happy to sit down and talk. We've got some things I think we'd like to see, and happy to have that discussion with him when he settles in.[/quote]

He also said that Canadian officials have already been meeting with Trump's advisers to help prepare the Canadian government to work with them.

Hail Satan.

Edit: One final Canada note. The Canadian immigration website is finally back up, after being overloaded for almost 24 hours. That's never happened after an election before. I wonder if it'll translate into anything.

Well, to be fair, there haven't been that many elections where there was a canadian immigration web site! I remember all my coworkers visiting that site after Bush won the first time. None of them actually moved to Canada.

That might have gotten traction in a totally different political climate. As is, it's not even worth wasting breath on.



This is not a smart way to do this, for reasons that should be immediately obvious.



This is a really not smart way to do this. Let z be a new regulation. Let y and x be existing regulations. Copy text of y and x into z. Pass z. Besides, why the hell do we think that the absolute number of is at all a metric for regulative burden?



This is similar to one, but may go somewhere because it doesn't need so much support to pass.



Sounds like a pointless idea, but it may be popular. It may violate the first amendment.




This could go somewhere





That is bad news. Protectionism is a bad idea. The data shows that NAFTA has generally improved standard of living for blue collar workers. Sudden disruption in trade is likely to cause economic problems. I'm not against reworking trade agreements, but I am against the idea of someone who has no idea what he is doing reworking trade agreements.




This was going to happen anyway. However, I think Obama is right that simply withdrawing will just give China more power to dictate trade terms. Negotiating means making strategic compromises. It doesn't mean magically getting everything you want.





K. My guess that if this hasn't been done already, there is a reason. Past administrations have been pretty critical of China's currency policy. I'm not so much against it as I'm worried about it being done without any real understanding of the situation.





So, business as usual?





I'd be interested to know how extensive these restrictions are. In the last decade we've massively expanded our production of oil and natural gas. Clean coal isn't going anywhere because natural gas is cheaper.





I am ok with this. Pipelines are safer and more environmentally friendly than the alternatives. It may be tricky to get through the courts when all is said and done.





So we will stop half-assing one thing, and do... something else? Not really sure what this entails.




I'm not sure what is going to get counted as unconstitutional here. Maybe "unpopular with my demographic", would have been more accurate for many of these.





If the democrats take control of the senate in 2018, don't be at all surprised if they refuse to vote on any new court picks.





Weirdly, it looks like Obama has beat you to it: http://dailycaller.com/.../justice-department-cuts-off.../





First, Obama has already deported 2.5 million criminal illegals while in office, during a period where illegal immigration has fallen. Second, there aren't that many criminal illegals in the country. That number includes a large number of people here legally. From what I can tell, this may just be a ham-handed incompetent version of what Obama is already doing.





We already do extreme vetting on immigrants from terror prone regions. That's why we are only taking in extremely small numbers of Syrian refugees.





That won't work, and congress shouldn't pass it. Keynesian deficit spending isn't a magical solution for arbitrarily high GDP growth, whether you massively cut taxes, or massively raise spending a. la. Bernie Sanders. We can't afford to massively raise the deficit, especially if we are going to risk hurting the dollar with tariff wars.




Yeah, see above. This is stupid and will wreck the economy. Hopefully the legislature is smart enough not to pass this.





Oh, cut taxes AND raise spending. This cannot possibly go wrong.




I'm not against letting giving parents a bit more choice when it comes to their kid's education, but most education funding is at a state level. Why on earth do we want to kill common core? Are we really listening to idiots on Facebook are confused by math being taught differently?



This is way too vague. What does it mean to replace Obamacare with HSAs? Certainly Obamacare facing serious problems, but we can't just massively change up the health industry every time a new party enters office. What is this "Red Tape" at the FDA? There are a lot of details here that very much need to be expanded upon. Expect a massive filibuster.





I feel like this would enjoy bipartisan support if everyone weren't so angry with each-other. It also sounds like the sort of thing that Republicans would normally be angry about.





I'd still love to know how you plan on making Mexico pay for it. Sounds expensive. Ladders sound cheap. Maybe an improved border surveillance program instead?





Oooooh! A task force. Those have a long and uplifting history of solving crime problems.





Both sides have wanted to do this for a while, but couldn't, because dysfunction.





That's literally just a name. Everyone wants this, but it's all in the implementation. Don't be surprised if legislature write themselves a bunch of new loopholes.

I agree with Obi_Kwiet on most of these points. A whole pile of "but, why??" in the last sections.

NAFTA has caused value-add job losses for Canada, increased net foreign investment (i.e. declining GNP), and has constrained domestic policy especially w.r.t. environmental protections (culturally important for Canadians).

NAFTA has also hurt small businesses in all three countries, which can't benefit from free trade as much as larger corporations.

There's a lot of room for improvement, is what I'm saying. You can substantially improve NAFTA without introducing trade barriers. I also doubt Trump would be personally renegotiating it.

Trade sanctions. Probably set off a tariff war, like you said.

Doesn't matter. Coal is too expensive, oil and NG are too cheap because the market is flooded. Neither of these would do anything. Keystone XL might get finished depending on where the construction contracts are at, but new projects aren't gonna happen for a long time.

Like I say, I'm ok with reworking trade deals. My problem guy who wants to rework them thinks that getting favorable trade deals is as simple as slapping on massive tariffs anytime your domestic industry isn't as competitive as you'd like.

The design of a production car engine could probably be improved if the right people work on it. But, if some moron tuner is put in charge of "showing all those idiots at Ford how to make more power," I'm going to dump my Ford stock ASAP.

Like I say, I'm ok with reworking trade deals. My problem guy who wants to reworked thinks that getting favorable trade deals is as simple as slapping on massive tariffs anytime your domestic industry isn't as competitive as you'd like.

The design of a production car engine could probably be improved if the right people work on it. But, if some moron tuner is put in charge of "showing all those idiots at Ford how to make more power," I'm going to dump my Ford stock ASAP.

I think the only question at this point is whether the economy is screwed fast enough for the Democrats to take the legislature in 2018, or whether they'll have to wait for 2020 to get their supermajority.

Trump's probably not going to be that bad for the US economy.

I guess it depends on whether he follows through or not. A 45% tariff on goods from China and Mexico and pulling out of trade agreements can't be good. The world economy is kind of fragile right now. I feel like the world's biggest economy hamhandedly starting trade wars is going to a lot of problems. Adding a crap ton to the debt while inflating currency with huge tariffs seems like a very bad plan.

I can't see these massive tax cuts doing much of anything for the economy, since companies are already sitting on massive cash reserves as is.

The China thing is probably a good example:

The reason companies outsource manufacturing to China is because it's cheaper, right? This is something called an arbitrage opportunity. Ordinarily in nature, as companies go to a foreign country for cheap labor, the locals get wise to what's happening and start charging more for their work. You know that whole thing about how nature abhors a vacuum? Well, that's basically what's happens when you exercise an arbitrage opportunity: it goes away over a few years. But that never happened in China, because the government is protecting their labor market and manipulating the global economy to keep their labor prices below what others can afford (sometimes even at a loss). This is prohibited by trade agreements but China does it anyway.

In the past, China has defended themselves against these kinds of charges by claiming the foreign governments are racist and sinophobic. They know how good that race card **** works against white people.

So here's Trump, a guy who has basically normalized racism. Oops, the race card won't work this time.

And Trump isn't just threatening China with sanctions, he is threatening them with a face-losing label.

So suddenly, China's at the table. And all Trump really wants to do is ask them to charge American companies more for Chinese labor. The factories and expertise are already in China, and multi-year deals are already signed, so this would effectively be a redistribution of American corporate profits to the Chinese state.

But, hey, it's not like Trump has personal experience negotiating with the Chinese government.

Fragility is a funny way of putting it. I assume by fragility you mean the totally artificial fragility created by financial companies, right? Derivatives traders make a few bad trades, then the "economy is bad" and Wall Street hits the global economy's big red button in a blind panic. One asteroid hits one city and this fragility goes away, so yeah, it's worth talking about, but it's not an actual problem problem (if you understand what I'm saying).

But there's a very real, very scary fragility to the global supply chain. While all anybody talks about is finance pooping their pants, our logistics are ****ed. There's a frankly unreasonable amount of industry-specific regional hyperspecialization now. It's not just like, you know, "all labor goes to China". There's **** like "all hard drives are made in one town in Malaysia" and "all motherboards are designed in one office building in Taipei". Parts and jigs and plans are flown and boated around the world a dozen times before you have a finished product. Christ, imagine if fuel prices go up again? Or if one of those cities ever gets destroyed. Or if the US is ever in an actual war with China? Oh my god, the entire US would shut down overnight. You wouldn't even be able to make your own flag ffs.

Trump could totally close your borders to imports and short-term destroy the economy, but in the long run the US would be better for it. Free trade is theoretically better for maximizing total utility but it's not strategically sound.

Anyway, my reading of the tariff and sanctions talk is just to scare companies and bring negotiators to the table. I can see Trump doing it if other countries don't play ball, but I doubt they won't.

Trump's tax cuts might be good or bad, depending on how long they're in effect and what they end up being. The corporate tax cuts could encourage foreign income repatriation and domestic investment. The bracket reduction, 1%, and estate tax cuts are basically incoherent and/or indefensible. Short-term reduction in revenue, maybe some long-term debt issues.

Yeah I remember hard drives doubling in price a few years back because of a single flood.

Comparison between Nazism and Neoliberalism.

Spoiler alert: the only difference is ethnic purges.

The news is reporting that Trump is already backing off his plans to build a wall ("a fence is appropriate" in some places) and plans for mass-deportations are off, they're going to focus on those with criminal histories such as violent crimes.

There is already a fence. There are already mass deportations. lol neofascists, y'all got played.

Trump isn't even planning on living at the White House. Man, we don't even get to see his brass-and-marble reno? What a rip-off. Now I'm glad I moved back to Canada.

Apparently Trump was seriously unprepared for his meeting with Obama and Obama is using it as an opportunity to show Trump the ropes a bit before leaving. Let's hope he convinces Trump to keep the ACA, and to not be so much of an idiot in general.

you don't say

I don't think there's any way obamacare survives Trump + republican control of the house and senate. The price of health care has skyrocketed and shows no signs of slowing under the current system. On the contrary it is accelerating at a blistering pace and nothing in obamacare is going to slow it down. At this point we are going to be pricing people out of the market and people are going to be losing their healthcare and we're going to be worse off than when we started.

I also don't think one conversation with Obama swayed Trump one way or another. Either he's smart enough to know that all the crap he spewed to get elected was never going to fly (likely) or all his advisors convinced him it wasn't possible (unlikely, IMO).

The price increase meaning the increase in what you pay is due to the insurance companies pricing in the tax penalty, not actually due to cost increases on their side. If you have to pay an X penalty for not having insurance, and you get Y benefit for having insurance, the price of insurance rises to X + Y - epsilon in the long run. That's what happens any time the government tries to **** around with pricing for any good.

The price increase meaning the increase in what the insurers pay is due to the mass proliferation of monopolies in healthcare, Medicare legislation mandating extreme information asymmetry in healthcare pricing, and extreme price inelasticity of demand for health services, because charging money for healthcare is literally extorting payment on penalty of death.

Basically what I'm saying is, private healthcare doesn't actually work, and mandatory participation in a private insurance market is essentially a more wasteful and less effective version of socialism.

I'll be okay with just about anything else if Obama can convince Trump that global warming isn't a Chinese hoax

The tax penalty is actually pretty small. Insurers are pulling out of a lot of markets because private insurance simply isn't profitable right now. However, they are still raking in massive profits, because the government made some really crappy medicaid contracts with them.

[/COLOR]

It's almost as if the overhead involved in what is literally a market attempt to solve market failure is completely pointless.

That doesn't matter: PPACA penalties get higher in real terms as you make more money, so higher-income families have more PPACA penalty to capture. That means the average price increase directly due to the PPACA penalty will be much higher than the actual tax penalty itself for most Americans. (Also, they aren't that small. Not really. Keep in mind, the average US household makes $51,939, so assuming they have a couple of kids they're looking at a $2,085 maximum penalty. That's 4% of their before-tax income! The penalty decreases as a percentage of your income until it is $12,240 at about a half mil income - or just 2.4%. Oh look, another neoliberal regressive tax. Take a drink.)

Actually I won't bull**** you, I did the analysis and I know what the profit-maximizing PPACA penalty price-in is. I did the analysis myself because I am a super fun guy who does super fun things with his free time.

Based on the 2016 PPACA penalty, the US income distribution and average household sizes at different income levels, private insurance rates by income, assuming all income levels incur the same costs for the insurer, and assuming nobody buys insurance if the price goes above the PPACA penalty, I estimate that the profit-maximizing individual plan premium increase due to the PPACA penalty is around $814 per household member. That means you can expect a 33% minimum premium increase solely due to the PPACA tax penalty, and corresponding increases as the penalty increases and people get "used to" the new prices. The expected price increase exceeds the PPACA penalty for families making $60,000 to $120,000.

Of course, this 33% increase is only my best effort at a ball-park figure with the data I have available. I suspect the reality is much worse, for the reasons I suggested above. Price floors, ceilings, subsidies, and penalties all suck.

Edit: Based on this analysis, I've created a table that shows the average extra amount that households will pay due to the PPACA tax penalty, broken down by income. Enjoy!

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"] Income of Household [/B][/TD]
[TD="align: center"] Insured Households [/B][/TD]
[TD="align: center"] Effective Penalty [/B][/TD]
[TD="align: center"] Price Increase [/B][/TD]
[TD="align: center"] Total Revenue Increase (Millions) [/B][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] 0 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1407.868 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,659.31 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,554.74 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,188.87 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $5,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1330.56 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,546.38 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,448.92 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,927.87 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $10,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2083.928 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,485.56 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,391.94 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,900.70 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $15,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2087.932 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,650.63 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,546.60 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,229.20 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $20,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2114.42 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,798.31 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,684.98 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,562.76 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $25,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3385.116 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,902.56 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,782.66 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $6,034.51 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $30,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3315.424 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,972.06 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,847.78 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $6,126.17 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $35,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3115.924 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,006.81 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,880.34 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $5,859.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $40,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2888.76 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,953.60 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $5,643.48 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $45,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2691.92 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,051.28 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $5,521.88 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $50,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3579.136 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,067.56 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $7,400.08 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $55,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2970.88 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,083.84 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $6,190.84 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $60,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3151.808 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,148.96 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $65,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2611.136 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,173.38 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $70,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2630.848 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,222.22 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $75,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2776.748 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,271.06 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $80,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2504.174 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,271.06 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $85,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2191.75 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,360.60 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $90,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2124.005 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,409.44 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $95,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1864.183 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,417.58 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $100,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2341.446 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,085.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,450.14 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $105,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1809.18 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,179.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,450.14 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $110,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1679.828 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,301.73 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,539.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $115,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1418.502 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,428.33 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,555.96 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $0.00 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $120,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1628.262 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,553.18 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,515.26 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $4,095.50 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $125,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1269.048 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,679.15 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,539.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,222.98 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $130,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1321.488 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,796.58 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,588.52 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,420.70 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $135,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1065.406 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,932.10 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,531.54 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,697.12 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $140,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1127.46 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,054.98 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,466.42 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,780.79 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $145,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 894.976 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,178.25 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,531.54 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,265.67 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $150,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 1001.604 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,298.50 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,539.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,543.75 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $155,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 741.152 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,429.43 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,564.10 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,900.39 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $160,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 764.75 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,550.48 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,547.82 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,948.45 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $165,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 686.964 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,677.53 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,572.24 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,767.04 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $170,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 626.658 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,804.23 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,612.94 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,637.42 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $175,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 530.518 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $3,929.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,669.92 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,416.44 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $180,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 541.006 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $4,051.38 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,596.66 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,404.81 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $185,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 485.944 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $4,182.48 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,604.80 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,265.79 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $190,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 423.89 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $4,306.03 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,678.06 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,135.20 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $195,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 381.064 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $4,430.28 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,661.78 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $1,014.31 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $200,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 2839.626 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $5,006.68 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,637.36 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $7,489.12 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] $250,000.00 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 3283.618 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $8,048.16 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $2,637.36 [/TD]
[TD="align: right"] $8,660.08 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Per Person Inc.[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]$814.00[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Total Revenue Inc. (millions)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]$107,250.90[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The main reason I've heard is Dodd-Frank. However, obviously that's gonna become a problem if companies keep choosing to exit markets instead of spinning off as Dodd-Frank intended.

indeed

Quit foolin around and finish Gorc, ya lazy immigrant!

I think that's my best contribution to a political thread ever.

Have you read 1177?

I will gladly (unhappily) choose to pay the penalty for not having health insurance because it is still better than the ****ty bronze plans with barely any coverage that still require an anus' weight in gold just to subscribe. I didn't vote for Trump but I am interested in seeing what his administration can do to fix the current health care situation which has essentially priced the middle class out of affordable insurance.

If we're going to penalize people, why not start with those that abuse the system? Stop going to the emergency room because you have a cold. Stop rushing to the ER because you have a headache and your GP is closed for the day. Let's penalize institutions for charging ~$80 for a single pill of ibuprofen just because it was administered on site. Let's stop the shameless proliferation of drug advertisements that encourage people to see their doctor and say, "I want that." Let's stop doctors from caving in when patients demand a drug they saw an advert for on TV. Let's stop penalizing those that neither profit from nor shift their burden onto others.

Insurance (car, health, phone, etc) is a scam and it's ridiculous to force people to buy in because it's the insurance companies that benefit, not the people. Over my lifetime I have paid more to insurance companies than I will ever see should something happen to me.

Sorry, I got lost in being a single, straight, white male again. I don't know what got into me when I have it so good.

^^ I'm with him.

Yeah, people tried to blame Canada's healthcare undersupply on this, too. In reality it almost never happens. Previously published studies (funded by medical associations) for the United States indicated a 10.1% non-urgent ER visit rate, but those studies didn't account for lack of access to primary care physicians (because there ****ing aren't any anymore) so going to the ER is the only option for those people. The actual figure is about 2.2% which is snuggled right up with the hypochondriasis rate in the general public. So, yeah, it's pretty much a made up problem.

The actual cause of medical undersupply/overburden the colleges and associations of physicians conspiring to keep med school admissions at the replacement rate. They do this to artificially drive up the cost of medical care for personal profit. This arrangement has been insanely lucrative for doctors, at extreme cost to their patients, who must suffer the substandard care provided by overworked physicians trying to make up for the million missing doctors in the United States alone.

The rest of what you said is spot-on. (Other than car liability insurance. Seriously, dude? It's not FOR you, it's for the dude you smoked. Don't like it, take the bus.)