What is the GOP’s political calculation on health care?

Don't get cancer under this new Trump plan because that bill will kille you.

The republicans are telling the lower and middle classes, if you can't afford healthcare, hurry up and die.

The Democrats screwed things up big league.

No Steven, these are the rates of Trump Care, that gives the insurance companies to charge the American People for per-existing conditions. WELCOME BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

How soon you forget Ron. Obama told us no individual mandate without the public option. From the minute he broke that promise the ACA was doomed.

Not only was the individual mandate UNCONSTITUTIONAL, it is at the center of why the ACA failed, because people chose the penalty over coverage they didn't want.

Look at these Trump care rates, do you think poor people can afforded health care if this bill gets signed into law?

What is the GOP’s political calculation on health care?

SUBJECT

---- Since we Explain Most things in USA by Law and What Would the Founding Fathers think?

I'll try to answer your deacon 'blackHebrewIsraelite' Question.....

1. in 1776...1783 there were PEOPLE that had Preexisting Conditions....(native&African)

2. in 1776...1783 these PEOPLE that had Preexisting Conditions needed medical help daily

3. in 1776...1783 these PEOPLE were NOT thought about by the Political class.....

4. SO, I guess those Indians & Africans ARE NOT the GOP’s political calculation in 2017.

Did you completely see this material Robert?

That's why the government will fund high risk pools Ron. And THAT is a constitutional authority granted to the legislature. No matter what anyone thinks of this new bill, the cause of it is the unconstitutional individual mandate, and THAT is the fault of the Democrats.

This bill was voted in by all Republicans this time and they own TRUMP CARE.

MY Republican congressman didn't vote for it. Once the Senate writes a bill, once the Senate and House reconcile their bills, once the President signs the bill, then we will know who owns the bill.

Did you see the chart for people with pre-existing condition? This is what the insurance companies can change extra a year and you approve of this?

The important thing to me is the repeal of the employer and individual mandates. Pre-existing conditions will be covered, as promised. It's simply being used as a scare tactic.

Speaking of charts, did you see the one showing funding of high risk pools?

BTW you've hit the jackpot tonight on Russia news.

The question is Steven: Did you see the chart for people with pre-existing condition? This is what the insurance companies can change extra a year and you approve of this?

Yes I saw the chart, and if that is the consequence of repealing the UNCONSTITUTIONAL employer and individual mandates then so be it.

I asked you did you approve of this?

If you don't like the Republican plan Ron, then sign on with Bernie and work for single-payer like the rest of the civilized world has. Sheesh.

I don't need to approve or disapprove of 'this'. I approve of constitutional law.

Think of how different it would have been Ron, if you all dumbasses had delivered Bernie rather than Hillary. Stop your crying and man up.

Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?

Bernie is leading the charge for single-payer. If you and he can get it done I'll support it.

Sir, I am not talking to Bernie or about Bernie at this time. My question is directed to you Steven, asking you about your opinion on this topic.

Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?

Stop complaining Ron and DO SOMETHING.

YOU STOP RUNNING AND ANSWER THE QUESTION.

I answered all your questions Ron. What the hell are you Democrats doing? NOT A GODDAMN THING.

When? Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?

Hey Steven I AM Talking to you!!!!!

CRICKETS.....

BLACK IN AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT A LIER LOOK LIKE.

I don't know NEAR as much about this plan as you do Ron. What I do know is it repealed the UNCONSTITUTIONAL provisions of the employer mandate and individual mandate of the ACA and THAT IS A VERY GOOD THING.

JUST LOOK AT THAT VIDEO AND FIND OUT. Once you do that, then answer my question.

I know that you don't know much about this bill, the people who voted on this bill don't know much about the bill neither.

You have not seen this report have you STEVEN?

I HOPE THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT THIS REPORT NOW STEVEN.

Pay attention Ron. I've seen and have been COMMENTING on your report.

You asked me to pay attention, now Steven, what did you say about this:

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

Just what I thought CRICKETS.....


You are a JOKE FuFu...

You're hopeless Ron.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

That's what I'm talking about, you sound like a broken record.

You want to run from a simple question. Answer this question Steven: "Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

You see everything as simple Ron, that's your problem.

I also see that chart that is the subject of this blog.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

You know nothing about this bill Ron. You haven't read it, you wouldn't understand it even if you had read it, you have no knowledge of healthcare economics, but you DO have a big head to nevertheless act like you are some kind of expert. Listen carefully Ron, I'll say it ONE MORE TIME. ANY BILL THAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS VASTLY PREFERABLE TO ONE THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SORRY STEVEN, Don't you tell me what I don't understand. I understand what I see about this chart.

What the hell do you mean by this: "ANY BILL THAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS VASTLY PREFERABLE TO ONE THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL."

STEVEN, I am not talking about any bill.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republican did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

Of course you are talking about a bill.

Now that we are talking about the same bill.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repel and replace AHCA law, that the republicans did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

Now that we are talking about the same bill, THIS bill is a CONSTITUTIONAL bill. The law it "repels" is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL law.

Are you talking about AHCA law being a UNCONSTITUTIONAL law?

The AHCA is a bill, it's constitutional. The ACA is a law, it's unconstitutional.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repeal and replace bill called the American Health Care Act, (AHCA), that the republicans did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

I know of no plan to repel the AHCA.

"Do you like this plan that the house just passed to repeal and replace the ACA law, called the American Health Care Act, (AHCA), that the republicans did not read, unscored, which the leadership has forced the membership to pass?"

Now that there's been time for some analysis yes, I like it.

What is it about his bill American Health Care Act, (AHCA) that you like, do you like what you see on this chart about how much the insurance companies can charge The American People with pre-existing ?

Once AGAIN Ron, I like that the AHCA is constitutional. As far as the chart, I'm skeptical.

Yeah it's OK to be skeptical because that is what in Trump Care.

It's proper to be skeptical because your chart is dated April 20, TWO WEEKS before the bill passed.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/he...

So you support the rate hike to the insurance companies for pre-existing conditions?

Oh!!! By the way Steven, Thank You for this link. In this link, I found this paragraph that supports my point about The American Health Care Act, (AHCA) TRUMP CARE.

A bad bill is about to get even worse. Just before recess, in an effort to revive the American Health Care Act, or AHCA, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and congressional Republicans proposed a plan for an “invisible risk pool.” And today, word has leaked that the pool is part of a broader plan to allow insurers in the individual market to charge a premium markup for enrollees with pre-existing conditions, with the pool put forth as a way to offset the premium increases resulting from the rest of the plan. Even before these changes, the AHCA would have thrown 24 million people off of their coverage to pay for massive tax cuts for the rich. Ryan’s most recent attempt to alter the bill would be even more harmful. Enrollees could see premium increases of tens of thousands of dollars, and the proposed invisible risk pool would shave only a tiny sliver off these increased costs for the sickest consumers.

I agree with this statement.

And nothing changed in this bill in the two weeks between the publishing of this report and the passage of the bill?

The Republicans made tat bill worst to appease the far right of there party in order to forefeel the promise to repeal and replace ACA Health Care Law.

So you support the rate hike to the insurance companies for pre-existing conditions?

I don't trust what you've told me about the rate hike.

And if you think you can then explain the methodology used in the report. It's at the end of the report in case you didn't read that far.

I have not told you a thing Steven, That chart you see is in this report.

So you support the rate hike to the insurance companies for pre-existing conditions?

I don't know anything about the rate hike. Neither do you Ron. If I'm wrong then explain the section at the end of the report under the heading Methodology.

Methodology
Under the ACA, insurers can vary premiums according to standard age rating curves but cannot vary them by health status. To estimate how rating up would affect premiums without pre-existing condition protections, we used relative cost factors from the CMS risk adjustment program, which is calibrated to the costs of the individual market population.
Our starting point for our estimate is the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, score of the AHCA, which projected the premium for an individual of age 40 would be $6,050 per year in 2026. Because the CBO score assumed community rating and because 40 is the average age in the exchanges, we believe that $6,050 is a good approximation of what the average premium would cost in that year for the exchange population. We therefore assume that $6,050 would be the premium for someone with average plan liability risk, or a score of 1.0. This person would be of average health status and therefore not perfectly healthy.
We applied just the CMS risk adjustment factors for age and s*x in order to represent the plan liability for a healthy individual. We took the risk factors for a male aged 40 to 44 (score of 0.221) and a female aged 40 to 44 (0.455), to generate a weighted average risk score for a 40-year-old (0.347) using the current male/female proportions in exchange enrollment. Multiplying the risk score by the average premium implies that $2,100 would be the actuarily fair premium for a 40-year-old with no health conditions.
Health plans would set premiums at the time of application and would need to price in unforeseen conditions among apparently healthy people. For example, enrollees may not become pregnant or receive a cancer diagnosis until after enrollment. Because current diagnoses and medical history are not perfect predictors of future health status, we assume the risk score for an enrollee with no conditions at the time of application would be 0.674, halfway between the average among all enrollees (1.0) and that of a person who remains healthy all year (0.374). This equates to a standard rate premium of roughly $4,020 annually for individuals healthy at the time of application.
We then used the CMS risk adjustment factors to estimate the relative cost of selected health conditions relative to the cost of a healthy individual, then converted these into dollar amounts representing premium surcharges. For example, an asthma diagnosis adds 0.717 to an individual’s risk score, increasing it by 106 percent. The asthma patient would pay a surcharge of $4,340 on top of standard rates for coverage because of that condition. Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage. To simulate the effect of the invisible risk pool, we lowered each amount by 1.5 percent.
Note that because the risk adjustment program calculates scores using each year’s current diagnoses, rather than medical history, we were unable to apply our method to estimate the rate ups individuals would face for prior health conditions. Our method also does not account for the adverse selection that would occur if community rating were repealed. The surcharges for pre-existing conditions would likely deter some relatively healthier sufferers of each condition to forgo insurance. Actual surcharges would, therefore, reflect the cost of treating the more severe cases of each condition and be higher than the amounts we estimate.

What is the GOP’s political calculation on health care?

SUBJECT

************************************************************

You're hopeless Ron.
Saturday, May 6th 2017 at 8:02PM
Steve Williams

********************************************************

You are hopeless ronGray....because YOU ARE unaware of where you are at......

This is BIA, An African American Family Site.....

Columbus, OH - There is much anticipation and conversation about CNN's six-hour "Black In America" report, which addresses the stereotypes and challenges that African American men, women, and families face.

Developed to give socially-conscious African Americans their very own online community

This SUBJECT....is of NO IMPORTANCE to African American Families

---- 95% of African American Families DID not SUPPORT the Political Republican Party since Georgia 1864

---- 95% of African American Families DID not VOTE for trump$ette.....the LYIN anti African American

take steveAdam AND find your site......Fake News for political Republican 'whitePolicy'

Now Steven, I hope that you understand what you have posted in your last reply. The asthma patient would pay a surcharge of $4,340 on top of standard rates for coverage because of that condition. Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage.

So do you support the rate hike to the insurance companies for pre-existing conditions?

You haven't yet explained the rate hike Ron. All you've done is parrot it.

I got this information from your last reply. Now do you agree with, what you posted or not?

It makes no sense to agree with an unknown.

You was the one who presented this information to boaster your point.

THESE are parts of Trump Care with is voted on by The House, which those congressman and women came together in the Rose Garden at he White House to celebrate the passing of this bill out of the House.

I asked you: do you agree with, what you posted or not?

Now here in come saying It makes no sense to agree with an unknown. WOW!!! You are sending out mix messaging?

Can you stand behind what you posted?

I can stand behind that your chart is suspect.

The KEY WORD in this question is "YOU!": "Can you stand behind what YOU posted?"

What I posted was so you could explain your chart. Which you can't.

Do you stand behind you YOU POSTED?

I stand behind wanting you to explain what Rachel posted. You wanted to talk about the chart but you didn't even have the sense to look in the lower left hand corner to see where it came from.

Pardon me, Morning Joe. It's more like something I'd expect from Rachel.

Steven, I have asked you a few times now Do you stand behind what YOU POSTED and you refused to stand behind the key points of the TRUMP CARE bill, that you had the nerve to post as your defense.

You are all massed up on this issue. have you heard of Republican Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, & Willie Geist?

Get yourself together man!!!!! Because you are coming to the strongest person with the weakest of "💩."

Joe is an EX Republican and what I posted is why I am skeptical of your chart.

I am asking you, Do you stand behind your POSTED reply?

I stand behind posting the full report behind your fake chart proving its fakeness.

You did not post the full report on this blog Steven, now you are running from what you posted here. Where is your credibility, your reliability, your good standing, your integrity and your trustworthiness?

If you can't stand by your own points that you post, you can't tell me or the membership, here at Black In America 💩 in good standing.

Look at the lower left hand corner of your chart Ron. I posted the full report because of your lack of competence.

If that is true that you posted the full report , then why are you running from this question: Do you stand behind your POSTED reply?

I stand behind it 100%

Then you are standing behind the give a way to the insurance companies for this found right here in your reply: "The asthma patient would pay a surcharge of $4,340 on top of standard rates for coverage because of that condition. Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage."

You support that to?

I don't support any part of the report.

How pathetic.

I stand behind it 100%
Wednesday, May 10th 2017 at 2:58PM
Steve Williams | delete | block member

Then you are standing behind the give a way to the insurance companies for this found right here in your reply: "The asthma patient would pay a surcharge of $4,340 on top of standard rates for coverage because of that condition. Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage."

You support that to?


I don't support any part of the report.
Wednesday, May 10th 2017 at 4:23PM
Steve Williams | delete | block member


How pathetic.
Wednesday, May 10th 2017 at 4:31PM
Steve Williams | delete | block member

Where is your credibility, your reliability, your good standing, your integrity and your trustworthiness?

If you can't stand by your own points that you post, you can't tell me or the membership, here at Black In America 💩 in good standing.

How pathetic Ron that you can't defend your "chart".

It's been a week Ron, a WEEK, and you can't even EXPLAIN it. You have no idea what it means. All you can do s wave it around in the air an CACKLE like Rachel.

The interesting thing about that chart has the same price the insurance companies will charge additional for patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage," As your posting of Trump Care that in one minute, you stand 100% with and in the next moment you don't support.

Your little mind is like a person that has a scattered brain. You just can't make up your mind can you? You don't know what direction to go into, do you? And you got the nerve to use the word "PATHETIC." WOW!!!

Your strategy is to parse words but the problem is you have no idea even HOW to parse words.

Do you see the same numbers for Advanced cancer, is the same number on the chart, that is in your post reply, don't you see that?

The numbers in the charts aren't the same, look again.

In addition, the numbers in the chart are based on the bill two weeks in advance of the bill as passed. But MSNBC was too lazy to even attempt to update the numbers let alone justify them.

This is a direct quote from what you posted: "Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage.

Now, I want you to go to the top of this blog and tell me and all the people on Black In America what numbers you see for advanced cancer, can you do that?

In the source chart there is a column labeled "surcharge adjusted for invisible risk pool". That is the piece you are missing. What's the invisible risk pool, and is it in the bill AS PASSED? How does the bill AS PASSED offset the surcharge. Figure that out Ron and show me the real numbers.

I asked you a question STEVEN

This is a direct quote from what you posted: "Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage.

Now, I want you to go to the top of this blog and tell me and all the people on Black In America what numbers you see for advanced cancer, can you do that?

What are the numbers?

Whatever the numbers are they are not the ones hawked by MSNBC.

No! NO! No! STEVEN,

Did you go to the your reply you quoted and posted and saw to numbers for people advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Now, I want you to go to the top of this blog and tell me and all the people on Black In America what numbers you see for people with advanced cancer, can you do that?

What are the numbers?

THIS BULL 💩 of "Whatever the numbers are they are not the ones hawked by MSNBC" is not what I asked you to do.

Now, What are the numbers?

I said I was skeptical of the chart put up by MSNBC. Then I went to the Center for American Progress website and found source of the chart and a detailed explanation of it. After that I was no longer skeptical. I was then CERTAIN that the numbers were bogus.

Did you go to what you posted to cite the numbers people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Is this a true Quote from your reply posting?

I don't think I quoted anything from the Center for American Progress report.

Other than the section titled METHODOLOGY.

Since you can't see that far up this blog, I will bring all of what you quoted down so you can see your reply


Methodology
Under the ACA, insurers can vary premiums according to standard age rating curves but cannot vary them by health status. To estimate how rating up would affect premiums without pre-existing condition protections, we used relative cost factors from the CMS risk adjustment program, which is calibrated to the costs of the individual market population.
Our starting point for our estimate is the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, score of the AHCA, which projected the premium for an individual of age 40 would be $6,050 per year in 2026. Because the CBO score assumed community rating and because 40 is the average age in the exchanges, we believe that $6,050 is a good approximation of what the average premium would cost in that year for the exchange population. We therefore assume that $6,050 would be the premium for someone with average plan liability risk, or a score of 1.0. This person would be of average health status and therefore not perfectly healthy.
We applied just the CMS risk adjustment factors for age and s*x in order to represent the plan liability for a healthy individual. We took the risk factors for a male aged 40 to 44 (score of 0.221) and a female aged 40 to 44 (0.455), to generate a weighted average risk score for a 40-year-old (0.347) using the current male/female proportions in exchange enrollment. Multiplying the risk score by the average premium implies that $2,100 would be the actuarily fair premium for a 40-year-old with no health conditions.
Health plans would set premiums at the time of application and would need to price in unforeseen conditions among apparently healthy people. For example, enrollees may not become pregnant or receive a cancer diagnosis until after enrollment. Because current diagnoses and medical history are not perfect predictors of future health status, we assume the risk score for an enrollee with no conditions at the time of application would be 0.674, halfway between the average among all enrollees (1.0) and that of a person who remains healthy all year (0.374). This equates to a standard rate premium of roughly $4,020 annually for individuals healthy at the time of application.
We then used the CMS risk adjustment factors to estimate the relative cost of selected health conditions relative to the cost of a healthy individual, then converted these into dollar amounts representing premium surcharges. For example, an asthma diagnosis adds 0.717 to an individual’s risk score, increasing it by 106 percent. The asthma patient would pay a surcharge of $4,340 on top of standard rates for coverage because of that condition. Metastatic cancer adds a factor of 23.6 to an enrollee’s risk score, such that a patient with advanced cancer would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage. To simulate the effect of the invisible risk pool, we lowered each amount by 1.5 percent.
Note that because the risk adjustment program calculates scores using each year’s current diagnoses, rather than medical history, we were unable to apply our method to estimate the rate ups individuals would face for prior health conditions. Our method also does not account for the adverse selection that would occur if community rating were repealed. The surcharges for pre-existing conditions would likely deter some relatively healthier sufferers of each condition to forgo insurance. Actual surcharges would, therefore, reflect the cost of treating the more severe cases of each condition and be higher than the amounts we estimate.
Monday, May 8th 2017 at 11:04PM
Steve Williams | delete | block member

Sir, I have been referring about this reply of yours all of the time. THE METHODOLOGY.

NOW, since I have brought it back to your remembrance the post that you cited, cite the numbers, with is the cost to extra to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Is this a true Quote from your reply posting?

Your question can't be answered without understanding the final paragraph. I don't understand it. That's why asked you to explain it, which so far you have not.

Note that because the risk adjustment program calculates scores using each year’s current diagnoses, rather than medical history, we were unable to apply our method to estimate the rate ups individuals would face for prior health conditions. Our method also does not account for the adverse selection that would occur if community rating were repealed. The surcharges for pre-existing conditions would likely deter some relatively healthier sufferers of each condition to forgo insurance. Actual surcharges would, therefore, reflect the cost of treating the more severe cases of each condition and be higher than the amounts we estimate.

Wait a minute I asked you to verify and recite those numbers that you quoted and I pin pointed a sentence that said this: "cite the numbers, with is the cost to extra to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Now, you are going to nutsville to say that you don't understand the last paragraph?

It took you from Monday, May 8th 2017 at 11:04PM until now to bring up this paragraph that don't fit this conversation to say that you don't understand your own response that you quoted from the Trump Care Bill that was past in the House of reps and celebrated by republican and the president only in the rose garden, Now you are telling me and the people here at Black In America, that you don't understand hat you posted.

You are looking real foolish now. How low will you go not to reply to the cost to extra to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

How LOW WILL YOU GO?

Wait a minute I asked you to verify and recite those numbers that you quoted and I pin pointed a sentence that said this: "cite the numbers, with is the cost to extra to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Now, you are going to nutsville to say that you don't understand the last paragraph?

NOW THIS IS VERY FUNNY and I quote you STEVN: I don't understand it. That's why asked you to explain it, which so far you have not. WHF are you asking me to explain something to you that you responded to me about and you don understand what you are doing. (LOL)

It took you from Monday, May 8th 2017 at 11:04PM until now to bring up this paragraph that don't fit this conversation to say that you don't understand your own response that you quoted from the Trump Care Bill that was past in the House of reps and celebrated by republican and the president only in the rose garden, Now you are telling me and the people here at Black In America, that you don't understand hat you posted.

You are looking real foolish now. How low will you go not to reply to the cost to extra to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

What is it that you don't understand about this sentence and my request STEVEN?

How LOW WILL YOU GO to run from your own words?

I don't know anything about the rate hike. Neither do you Ron. If I'm wrong then explain the section at the end of the report under the heading Methodology.
Monday, May 8th 2017 at 10:58PM
Steve Williams | delete

Looks like it's been 3 days Ron, with not a PEEP from you.

Do you understand what you READ Steven? This is your reply Steven.

I asked you to explain the section THEN posted it for your convenience. Tell me what it means Ron, and I will answer your question about the rate hike.

And guess what Ron? At the WH briefing today there was not a SINGLE question about the healthcare bill. THEY ARE OBSESSED WITH RUSSIA. AND BOY, DOES NBC EVER HAVE A SCOOP TONIGHT!!!

No one can say the President isn't fair.

Sorry Steven, it don't work like that. You post something and you don't understand what you have posted, is Pure BULL💩, why did you post something that you did not understand?

You continue to look real foolish now, more thoughtless then ever before.. How low will you go not to reply to the cost to extra statement you posted to people with advanced cancer to see what they would pay an additional $142,650 for coverage under TRUMP CARE?

Is this found in your reply you sent me?

I posted the report for YOU Ron, so you could try READING for a change.

So you gave me something that you did not understand. WOW!!! I can't make this up, if I put my speech writers on it. WOW!!! (LOL) as I pick my old behind off of the floor with laughter. OK!!!

I GAVE YOU SOMETHING I KNEW YOU WOULD NOT EVEN ATTEMPT TO UNDERSTAND.