greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 17^th, 2017 at 11:35am:


This may be Trump's saving grace and save America to boot:  he is a real estate salesperson, and what do good salespeople do? They deliver.

AiA wrote on Jan 17^th, 2017 at 12:20pm:


Lie through their teeth.

AiA wrote on Jan 17^th, 2017 at 12:45pm:


Lie to the customer and give him what he thinks he wants.

AiA wrote on Jan 17^th, 2017 at 12:45pm:



rubbish


a good salesperson has the ability to convince you that what you want is his product, even if it doesn't meet any of your requirements

It's obvious the ACA, as it exists now, is a failed experiment.
Adler and Ginsburg argue that the ACA both improved coverage and lowered costs. If true, the exchanges would undoubtedly be more successful than they are. Thus far, the result is significantly worse than expected, with far fewer enrollees—particularly younger and healthier enrollees—than projected, and substantial market instability. Another Brookings Institution scholar, Stuart Butler, recognizes the problem, writing just two weeks ago that “the ACA might be more appropriately labeled the ‘Medicaid Expansion Act’” because “enrollment in the ACA exchanges has been disappointing, with an estimated 10 million fewer people enrolled compared with earlier expectations.”

The new Brookings study does not mention the numerous studies, including the rigorous 2014 Brookings study, that come to opposite conclusions, does not use actual pre-ACA individual market data, does not consider the huge increase in the cost of medical claims in the individual market after 2013, and makes a number of questionable methodological choices. The authors arrive at a different conclusion than most scholars who have examined the effect of the ACA on health insurance premiums. Most scholars and analysts conclude that, particularly when fully accounting for the various government subsidies for individual insurance coverage, the ACA significantly increased individual market premiums.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2016/07/28/overwhelming-evidence-that-obamacare-caused-premiums-to-increase-substantially/2/#2e036c4e6c12

My health insurance cost has more than doubled since 2014, with no illnesses or injuries in my household.
Obamacare and ACA are two names for the same act, as much as the Administrative branch has tried to back off from their role in it.
'Obamacare' vs. 'Affordable Care Act': Does the name matter?
The Obama administration appears to again prefer 'Affordable Care Act,' whereas previously, the president had embraced the label 'Obamacare.'
Does it matter what President Obama calls his health-care reform law? That question arises because he’s seemed to shift his references in recent days. Previously, he’d embraced the label “Obamacare,” saying it reflected the fact that he did indeed care about uninsured Americans. But as Politico notes, that term now seems to have fallen into White House disfavor.

Instead, the administration appears to again prefer “Affordable Care Act” (ACA), which reflects the law’s full name, “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” That’s how Mr. Obama has been referring to it in public. Democratic Party talking points now emphasize the “Affordable Care Act” phrase.

“Calling it the Affordable Care Act has advantages for Democrats seeking to defend health care reform while still criticizing the bungled White House rollout,” Politico’s Reid J. Epstein wrote last week.

Think this is just a minor tweak, or maybe the media are reading too much into the president’s rhetoric? We’d say that’s highly unlikely. Administrations poll voters on the use of one word or another all the time. Indeed, that’s a technique used throughout US politics.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2013/1129/Obamacare-vs.-Affordable-Care-Act-Does-the-name-matter

Insurance for everybody goes against what the current crop of Republicans want. To blame the expensive and inefficient American healthcare system on a band-aid called "Obamacare" is to say you understand nothing at all ...

John Smith wrote on Jan 17^th, 2017 at 2:37pm:



Actually a good salesperson has to be very "dialed in" during his interactions with the consumer.(health care consumer or otherwise).

This is Trumps great asset which few politicians have.
Most politicians , especially in australia , live in a strange vortex where they arent constantly rubbing up against 'the marketplace" or as i like to call it "reality".

From Rudd to Gillard to Abbott to Turnbull...they are surrounded by a circle of "influence' which insulates them from this very reality.

a salesperson is confronted by the marketplace and reality every moment of every day.
the market place is a brutal and harsh mistress.  any rough edges, any miscalibrations, any flaws in your emotional mastery and core confidence will be brutally and unmercifully exposed and you will have to learn and internalise these lessons, again and again and again until you get it right.

the marketplace will purify the many weaknesses and defects in someones character.

the , literally, millions of reference experiences which a man like Trump has been through to get to where he has gotten...wow....just wow.
this is what makes a man qualified and makes an intellectual who is "stuck in his head" and "raw to the game"   a no show.

i suppose one could liken trump to a sergent who has been down in the trenches fighting and grinding it out for his whole life...battle hardened and wise.

one could liken clinton or obama to a general who has been back at a chalet , 20 miles behind the front lines , sipping brandy and pontificating.

Tough times are coming and i know who i would rather have beside ME in the trenches