GOP lawmakers snap up surging health insurance stocks as they gut Obamacare

[roomwithaview]

@lava

Its not considered insider trading by the SEC?

By definition, yes, but congress-critters are exempt from SEC purview.

[roomwithaview]

@Shirley_LeGitte

something must be very wrong with the way they are running that company…

Oh, the list of wrong in all this is longer than anyone could possibly imagine!

[roomwithaview]

@failquail

why it’s so important that wealth is de-linked from politics

That’s why I never trust any of the rich politicians, the money is never clean.

Unfortunately if one looks at the poorest one finds they are simply idiots who have lost their dirty money.

So until we can educate the general populace sufficiently to get only the good, right, decent, and honorable statesmen-and-women elected, I’m a-feared we’re scrood!

[lolipop_jones]

@roomwithaview

get only the good, right, decent, and honorable statesmen-and-women elected

The best systems of government work on the assumption that many, nay most, who seek office will be greedy and venal, and include provisions to limit the damage they can do.

Generally speaking, I find that people who get wealthy before entering into politics do less damage than those who get wealthy afterward.

[Schmorgluck]

“Some say concentrated power leads to abuse, but I believe that if an institution has a solid foundation, it can survive the narrow aspirations of the people it employs.” Sam Carter - Deus Ex

[Michael_R_Smith]

@lolipop_jones

Generally speaking, I find that people who get wealthy before entering into politics do less damage than those who get wealthy afterward.

So is Trump correct when he says he wants rich cabinet members?

Oh and also, as a citizen of a country with a pretty good public health care system I think the US would do just fine with totally capitalist free market health care.

[coherent_light]

@lolipop_jones

Democrats had the White House and filibuster proof Congress in 2009-10 and could have done single payer or Medicare for all.

But they chose a plan that would guarantee the insurance companies profits instead.

It was bipartisan, yes. But perhaps not in the sense you intend it to mean. Imperfect legislation is often better than no legislation, certainly so for the ACA.

(If it had been monopartisan, it would have been emphatically repealed sooner, as opposed to later.)

@lolipop_jones

Generally speaking, I find that people who get wealthy before entering into politics do less damage than those who get wealthy afterward.

And this is how only the wealthy get their concerns heard in the first place.

[roomwithaview]

@coherent_light

Imperfect legislation is often better than no legislation

I’ve heard it said this is often the goal as modification is much easier than repeal. I.e. get a crappy version on the books first and then fix the flaws as they become obvious.

[smoofsmith]

The foxes are in the henhouse. As predictable as the sun coming up. We need a better henhouse.

[One_Brown_Mouse]

@Footface

bunch of shitbags.

Is bunch the correct collective noun?

I thought it was panel - A Panel of Shitbags.

[One_Brown_Mouse]

@smoofsmith

The foxes are in the henhouse. As predictable as the sun coming up. We need a better henhouse.

We need to get the hens to turn off the Fox.

[Footface]

A senate of Shitbags.

[AnthonyC]

Unless dissatisfaction eventually translates to voting behavior…

@JamesBean: I saw an article recently, I think in the NYT, that said over 20% of people in red states live in counties with one or no insurers on the exchanges, compared to about 2% in blue states (i.e. ACA success or failure depends largely on state cooperation).

[OhhJim]

@LurksNoMore

I’m curious as to how long the not-rich Republican voters keep on voting these bastards in; at what point does the personal hurt overcome the tribalism, the racism, and the vacuous rancor at “urban liberals”?

Because:

1. They don’t hear/read about it
2. If they do, it’s fake news from that lying media
3. The bastards are still better than Evil Hillary or the Gay Kenyan

In other words, they screw themselves, I guess.

[JamesBean]

@lolipop_jones

Those subsidies are required because the actuarial math of Obamacare as enacted was highly flawed.

Uh, no. Those subsidies are part of the actuarial math of Obamacare. Obamacare was always going to be expensive. That’s why the repubs are so intent on repealing it, they want their tax money back.

[lolipop_jones]

No. The way it was supposed to work was that those insurers/states who made money on Obamacare policies would subsidize those who lost money. (This is different from the individual subsidies).

The actuarial flaw is that there are many more of the latter and many fewer of the former.

[JamesBean]

Oh please. The subsidies that rubio ripped out and the subsidies that trump keeps equivocating on are part of the original ACA. Any attempt to say that they aren’t is fantasy.