Debt as related to income
 

First this is not a Political statement I'm just talkin about facts.
If you really want to talk about the national debt you have to go back about 10 years when a certain president double the debt and 8 years of his term. Both parties should be blamed 4 the lack of balls to either raise taxes or cut back on expenses. There are many years where the difference could have been five or 10% raising taxes and lowering expenses to have least balance a budget. The current president just like the last one from the other party blames current conditions for all the expenses incurred to protect the US citizen and the economy I truly doubt either party will ever get a handle on a budget the best we can ever hope for his continuing lowest ever interest rates in the world so that the US Treasury and continue borrowing at near zero rates. The really scary thing would be for inflation to get out of control and going back to when Carter was president at 12 - 18% interest rates. In that case you would see, 100% oh tax revenue going towards paying the national debt, then we would have spiraling inflation like Argentina or were there third world countries where a Dollar would be worthless

I believe the rates you pay for health insurance already have the cost of pre-existing conditions factored in. This is why the cost of health insurance went through the roof after the passage of the ACA when costs were supposed to have gone down. If they do not cover pre-existing conditions then I doubt anyone over 40 will ever be able to get health insurance. Would be bad business for the insurance companies.

"..No one wants anyone denied health care because of pre existing conditions.. "

Whoa! What planet have you been on?
Totally false statment.

Agree wholeheartedly! Pre-ex health conditions and social security's demise are always part of fear mongering put forth during a given political season, mostly by those not in power.

What you. need is universal health care - it gets better outcomes at a lower cost.

IMHO, this thread seems like a bunch of malarkey by a bunch of old people, with no hard facts and nothing better to do but look for something to complain about that hasn't happened.....wow

Not sure where you get your information, but hoping you will share it.

Center for Budget and Policy lays it out clearly so to understand what is going before the Supreme Court, but then again we have been promised an alternative over the past years.

Suit Challenging ACA Legally Suspect But Threatens Loss of Coverage for Tens of Millions | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

There's a lot of tough talkers on this forum. It's easy to talk tough when you get relatively free Medicare on the taxpayer's dime. Let's see how tough you talk if and when you are thrown into the same boat as those who have to worry about getting private health insurance, and protection for pre-existing conditions is no longer a right. I heard there is a new Obamacare replacement plan to be announced in just a couple of weeks; but then again, I have been hearing this for the last 3 years.

Requiring companies to insure people with preexisting conditions has only been since the Affordable Care Act began. Before then, companies weren’t required to accept them, usually. (The big exception was in employment that came with insurance.) This was VERY expensive for those with pre-existing conditions, but we didn’t hear about it much, or we just turned away. Getting rid of that requirement was something that half the people in the country voted for, however, in 2016. That requirement is very expensive. Now that we have experienced it, however, we don’t want to give it up because we realize that we could be in a position to need that coverage.

It comes down to what is the insurance pool. Should it include everyone who pays, or should it exclude those we know will have a lot of expenses? Imagine if, say, you have diabetes, and your insurance is quadruple the price of your neighbor who has the good sense to come down with diabetes after he signs up. Imagine deciding to go without insurance because $20,000 a year is more than you can afford, but knowing that this may be a death sentence. We are right to think about this and be concerned. Even among the retired, there are plenty who get Medicare Part A but can’t afford Part B. They take the risk and hope they don’t get sick until the day they die.

He’s trying not to be political your President is lying about replacement healthcare!

One might consider most people who worked paid 1.45% of there
FICA also matched by their employers for Medicare coverage which you can’t tap into until age
65 , unless your collecting social security disability. What exactly does one mean free ?

fake news

Free ? What part of FICA does one not understand?

people seem to be under the illusion that private companies are offering the kind of health insurance they did when they were in the work force. They are not. Many companies keep people working just under the amount of hours needed to get health insurance thu the company. Companies that still offer it, don't offer the type of plans that were once offered and it's almost never free anymore. To tie health insurance to work is archaic. There is no security in one's job anymore. Corporations think nothing of cutting jobs when they need to give more to their stock holders. doctors end up bringing patients in more often to increase revenue because reimbursements keep being cut. doctors have to employ people whose only jobs are to deal with insurance companies. the time has come for some kind of basic insurance for everyone. those that want more can buy supplemental plans. there are people that have insurance and have had a medical catastrophe and the deductibles and copays have caused them to declare bankruptcy. the individual mandate made sense--younger people's contributions helped pay for the program when they needed it less. Social Security was considered socialism once. and it ran on the same principle. yes, we paid into it, but it's the people in the work force now that keep it going. "The taxes paid by active workers help support today’s generation of retirees — which is a big reason why some policymakers are concerned about the program’s long-term solvency. In 1950, the average American lived for 68 years and retirees were supported by 16 active workers. Now, the average life expectancy is 78 and just three workers support every retiree." According to the institute’s data, a two-earner couple receiving an average wage — $44,600 per spouse in 2012 dollars — and turning 65 in 2010 would have paid $722,000 into Social Security and Medicare and can be expected to take out $966,000 in benefits. So, this couple will be paid about one-third more in benefits than they paid in taxes."Thus, Social Security is — and always has been — a transfer system from younger generations to older generations."
Urban Institute, "Social Security and Medicare Taxes and Benefits over a Lifetime," 2012

No such thing as FREE healthcare. Someone has to pay for it and no one wishes to pay higher taxes. No one is turned away from the ER and there are free clinics available in most states. Other countries that have "free" healthcare pay for it by taking half of your paycheck in taxes. Have any of you ever been to a socialized medicine country and stayed at one of their hospitals? Compared to ours, they are dumps. I went to one country where I was living in the capital of the nation and had to visit the main hospital for a some tests. No lights in the hallways, a broken window, a folding cot to sit on for an ultrasound test, and the MRI was done in a trailer in an alley. One country, you had to provide a blanket for a family patient. No private rooms in these countries, just wards.

American is GREAT!