this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
973 points (98.2% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

6939 readers
19 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Didn't they have control of the House and Senate last time and still couldn't get it repealed before? Do they have the votes to get rid of it this time?

Assuming they get rid of it, assuming Trump actually steps down in 4 years, and assuming we ever have another election (big ifs, I know), could this actually help Democrats for the next few election cycles?

[–] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

This was the one reason I wasn't cheering for the filibuster to be repealed. The 60 vote threshold was the only thing that saved it last time. They will only be able to realistically get rid of it if they abolish the filibuster. Which would be a net win for Democrats, so they likely won't do it.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Didn’t they have control of the House and Senate last time and still couldn’t get it repealed before?

Repealing the bill would mean revoking tens to hundreds of millions from various states. A lot of the healthcare and health insurance industry (which is dominated by right-wing financial interests) sees ACA as a valuable income stream. Its hard to uproot for the same reason Social Security and Medicaire/caid are hard to uproot. There's simply too much money running through the system and too many private interests invested in the flow.

[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 months ago (15 children)

I genuenly don't know how ACA works. Most people get insurance through their employer, is that affected by ACA? Not sure of the exact search terms to find the answer for it.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

back when the aca was new and neat, i was unemployed long enough to need it. back then the govt subsidized premiums enough to make it affordable. earlier this year i was unemployed again for a bit and looked into it again. literally no better than cobra. all it offered now was helping you sign up for a full price policy the cheapest of which was $850/m with no subsidy or even tax break at all. coulda been because i live in texas but i dunno. didnt go through with it

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›