Further, if the ACA benefits anyone, it benefits people who don't work but receive subsidies. So getting rid of it is a decided plus for workers.
Jobs in government, not in private industry. Would you rather we all go on the gov payroll?
I heavily support the pre-existing condition clause in the ACA but the rest of it is a clusterfuck. The way it's designed inscentivizes only the riskiest people to join groups and everyone else to go without insurance.
The ACA's "profit model" is also greatly skewed towards overcharging the young and healthy. Our oldest generation is the most wealthy population group and our youngest are reletively one of the poorest in US history... As a young healthy male my insurance cost has gone from $55 to over $300 a month due to the ACA. I recently just ditched insurance because that's too much money to pay for a service I get hardly any benefit from.
It's yet another money siphon built by the boomers to fuck over the mellenials.
Sure, the ACA has some short-term, especially anecdotal benefits. I'm glad your wife was able to use it productively while it was available to her... but the ACA is loaded up with give-aways paid for with other people's money - so it's unsurprising that there are some who think it's a good deal for them.
If I give you my neighbor's big-screen TV, I'm sure you'd have a great story about getting a big-screen TV. But you aren't the only party in that transaction.
Long term, the system set up by the ACA is collapsing. Insurers are fleeing from the markets because they don't make economic sense without ever increasing government subsidies to the industry.
Worse, the big promise of the ACA was that it would lower costs for everyone without changing their doctor-patient relationships. Those were lies. Not just mistakes, but pre-meditated and documented lies.
I think looking at it as a zero sum thing is framing it the wrong way anyway though.
Sharing equally in the productivity of the society is just communism. It fails every time because people have varying levels of productivity but when you compensate everyone equally no matter what effort they apply, you get a tragedy of the commons situation.
Communism has been tried many times and has never been shown to be good for workers.
Does it have to be an executive action?
Traditionally, the President wasn't the one creating the laws to begin with. So if Congress passes a law and Trump signs it, is it his action then?
