Alan Zweibel

This is another contender. But Trump sent it back to the drawing board because the ballroom was too small

Talking about ignorance. Do you even read what you post. According to the information you provided Medicaid is extended to people with low incomes. Up to 138% of the poverty level. This is your idea of middle class? What's more, offering extemded Medicaid to those people is voluntary on the part of the states. Red states like Florida and Texas refuse to offer it. AI is a good place to start. But you should always check its sources. I go with super reliable sources like the Wall Street Journal: "Health insurance has never been a flashy, high-growth business. But for many years it offered something nearly as good: steady, dependable returns, fueled by the expansion of government programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and the Obamacare exchanges. Lately, though, Wall Street has a problem with America’s health insurers: They keep missing their numbers. What began as trouble in Medicare Advantage has now spread across nearly all government-backed plans, signaling deeper issues in the model itself. https://archive.ph/LUlDU#selection-747.0-755.103 And as the article on which this topic is based noted, insurers are withdrawing from the market. Anyway, it's good to see that you are opposed in principle to private insurers making a profit from health care. I am, too. I think it's inevitable that some time in the future America will switch to single payer. But getting there will take some time.

You should start a new topic about that issue.

This is your idea of evidence? A stupid quip? The percentage of uninsured Americans was cut in half by the ACA. That's what it did.

"The documents were available for several hours Monday afternoon and evening on the Justice Department website but appear to have been taken down around 8 p.m. The Washington Post downloaded the full set of files while they were accessible. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to questions about why the documents had been posted and then apparently removed." https://archive.ph/PhTQA

It depends on the poll. Here are a couple of interestng results from a Data for Progress Poll https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/11/medicare-for-all-is-popular-even-when-put-up-against-attacks On the other hand a Pew poll shows that 35% of Americans favor single payer, while another 31% favor a mix of government programs and private insurance Most Americans say government has a responsibility to ensure health care coverage Most Americans (66%) say the federal government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage. Far fewer (33%) say it does not, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted Nov. 17-30, 2025, among 10,357 U.S. adults. 35% of all adults favor a single national health insurance system run by the government. 31% say insurance should continue to be provided through a mix of private companies and government programs https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/12/10/most-americans-say-government-has-a-responsibility-to-ensure-health-care-coverage/ I think the politically most feasible path is to open Medicare coverage to those who want it.

What kind of BS are you spouting? The reason ACA was created was precisely because private health insurance was rapidly becoming unaffordable for middle class people. Especially for middle aged people or older or those who had lost their jobs. Are you claiming that the healthcare system in America wasn't the most costly system in the world before ACA? And despite your allegedly good genes, you think health catastrophes only happen to those at a genetic disadvantage? Good genes ward off accidents or exposure to environmental or workplace toxins? Just because it turns out that you didn't need the insurance, that doesn't mean it was prudent go go without it. Unless, of course, you've got that crystal ball or time machine.

How exactly did the ACA make healthcare unaffordable. Haven't Americans always paid a lot more for medications than elsewhere? Why is this the ACA's fault? As for insurance companies still dropping sick people..the only ones that can do this now are those that are allowed by the Trump administration. Garbage polices that turn out to be worthless when people need them.

Another case of post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this). You make a claim that subsizized health insurance has raised costs of health care for everyone but offer no explanation of how that works. As for your claim that you were paying $16,800 in insurance. If you weren't benefiting from subsidies, that means your income was at least $197,647. If you were benefiting from subsidies. that premium looks suspect.

"That's a lot taxes for free healthcare, especially for someone like me, who never really needed it." Someone who apparently doesn't understand why there is such a thing as health insurance. Maybe, I'm being unfair. Maybe you have a time machine or a crystal ball? It's true that health insurance is a lot of money if it turns out you didn't need it. On the other hand, it's a bargain if turns out you did.

Which is why a lot of Republican members are sh**ting bricks now that the extension has failed.

Or common among those suffering from willful ignorance.

I'm sure in your mind that this has something to do with the ACA. I'm at a loss for how to unconfuse you.

Stop projecting.

I'm sure you think that "jumping in" whatever that means, is Pavlovian.

Once again, you betray your frail mastery of English. Was the language in the Wikipedia article just too grown up for you?

Thanks for the Pavlovian response. This has exactly what to do with health insurance?

For the first 2 years of his presidency Republicans controlled the House and Senate. And how exactly did the ACA make employer sponsored plans more expensive. As for "the deep state is really enjoying their profits".... you got any actual evidence to support that claim?

Yes, they committed the sin of living in America. Some of them compound that by coming down with life threatening illnesses. Shame on them!

There are all kinds of socialism as you implictly acknowledge in this statement: "By contrast, state socialism is enforced by law." So while there may be no compulsion in the religious variety of socialism, it is clear that it is a mark of grace from the creator." At least according to that dubious document called the New Testament. And of course we have several statements from Jesus unambiguously condemning the accumulation of wealth. So, who do you trust more, Jesus or Peter?

Actually, I think it was rather a plan for a concept of a plan.

You asked a question. You got an answer. And a very thorough one. One that corresponded to my thinking on the subject. Why should I spend my time writing up something custom made for you when a perfectly good answer already exists?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism

JACKSON HOLE, Wyo. — Like millions of other Americans, Stacy Newton turns to Healthcare.gov to shop for health insurance for her family... But for the Newtons and many others in the country, next year’s menu is severely limited: There is only one company offering ACA plans here — and costs have risen steeply. To continue health coverage for themselves and their two teenage children, the Newtons would have to pay an annual premium of $43,000 — about a third of their gross income. It is the price of the cheapest plan available to the family from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Wyoming, the only ACA insurer left in Teton County. https://archive.ph/ybtU5 Apart from the cutback in subsidies, another reason for the high rate is the fact that in the face of such high rates, younger, healthier people are more likely to take a chance and forego paying for insurance. Which means that whoever is left in the pool are going to be older and more unwell.

I doubt you've been mocked for having posted only 89 times. But if your posts here are a representative sample of the kind of the empty and bizarre generalizations you offer elsewhere, I can see why those posts might have received a less than enthusiastic reception. Here's some socialist literature for you to ponder: Acts 2:44-45 (NIV): "All the believers were together and shared everything they had. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need". Acts 4:32 (NIV): "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had". It comes from a document popularly known as The New Testament.