and so the truth is revealedOriginally Posted by MellonColly
Corporal
and so the truth is revealed
VP of Operations
You know, what I dont think you guys are getting is that he isn't providing health care nor is he proposing that the government provide it but he is requiring Americans to buy insurance. Punishable by heavy fines which the Supreme Court has already classified as a tax. There goes the "no tax increase on the middle class"..
Sergeant
If you already have insurance nothing much is changing. You are just now covered for pre existing conditions and quite a few other things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_...details)...and like me, when I came out of school I could still stay on my parents plan since the age is 26 for that now. But I got a job so I didn't have to worry about that. My sister for instance tho, shes 23 and goes to school part time and lives at home so this helps her out. She doesn't have to go buy insurance and can stay on my parents plan.
Starting in 2013, an extra 0.9% Medicare tax will be charged on:
(1) salary and/or SE income above $200,000 for an unmarried individual,
(2) combined salary and/or SE income above $250,000 for a married joint-filing couple, and
(3) salary and/or SE income above $125,000 for those who use married filing separate status. For self-employed individuals, the additional 0.9% Medicare tax hit will come in the form of a higher SE bill.
Here you go. There's the extra cost.
imo the advantages outweigh the extra costs
1. covering pre existing conditions
2. no more cap on insurance costs when i get older
3. stayin on parents plan til 26
4. Prohibiting Insurance Companies from Rescinding Coverage
5. reducing fraud in health care and cutting costs (still to be seen)
VP of Operations
YOu don't have anything here about the Individual Mandate which requires all people to buy insurance and if they don't then they will be fined. THey can take their income tax checks. A lot of poor people that I know personally, need that and cannot afford to have that taken away. That is the Tax on the middle income and poor people I am referring to. \Granted, the first year, it is like $100, but if the continue to not be able to afford to buy a policy, they can be fined up to $4000. HOw can the working poor afford that. And since when can the government demand that the people BUY a certain product??? DO you know the only time in our history that the government compelled the people to buy anything?? Around the time our constitution was written, the government compelled every man to buy a gun.
YEs, those things that you talk about aren't so intrusive, but students could stay on their parents insurance until they were 24 if they were students before all this anyway. I know because my kids stayed on their mom's policy the entire tie they were in college. However, and what a lot of people either don't care to remember or just don't pay attention, but the poor people have always had health care. If someone shows up at any state hospital, they are treated and if they can't pay, they are treated anyway.
Do you also realize that most "small companies" that employ 50% of our workforce, file taxes as an individual? They aren't big enough to file as a corporation and don't get the corporate payroll tax breaks, so what is that tax increase going to do to that small company> Encourage them to hire more employees? I doubt it very seriously. So, .9 tax increase on 100 employees, what does that work out to? A lot more than you realize. That is going to encourage hiring more employees too isn't it? Oh I see this doing wonders toward bringing down our unemployment rate, don't you?
The program is unsustainable in its current form.
Last edited by Dogma; 10-29-2012 at 10:14.
Hall of Fame Asst Commissioner
All this is why you should go with a single payer system like the NHS. 100% coverage, no fines, no rejections. If you get sick, you get treated for free. Of course, this would require a tax raise, but that is a small price to pay.
VP of Operations
Health insurance costs for families are up considerably: “Kaiser’s survey found that annual insurance premiums to cover people through their employers average $5,429 for single people and $15,073 for a family of four in 2011. Those rates rose 8 percent for single people and 9 percent for families. In 2010, premiums rose just 3 percent for families from the previous year.”
Then there’s the price hikes in the current year: “The cost to cover the typical family of four under an employer plan is expected to top $20,000 on health care this year, up more than 7 percent from last year, according to early projections by independent actuarial and health care consulting firm Milliman Inc.”
PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Health Research Institute projects medical costs will increase 7.5 percent for 2013, a rate they characterize as “relatively flat growth.” The National Business Group on Health projects a similar figure: “With the cost of employer-provided health care benefits at large U.S. employers expected to rise another 7 percent next year, employers are eyeing a variety of cost-control measures including asking workers to pay a greater portion of premiums but also sharply boosting financial rewards to engage workers in healthy lifestyles, according to a new survey by the National Business Group on Health, a non-profit association of 342 large employers.” Quoted from "http://www.nationalreview.com"
Sergeant
the cost of everything is up right now. Of course costs will be high for this too until the market evens out. It's new and insurance companies still want to make there .02 cents. Do you really think they will keep costs down if they are having to foot the bill for more people?
And the idea that people can get free care is laughable....really dogma? You think that walking into the ER and getting care is the best route for these people who can't afford it? Come on..
VP of Operations
No, Ang, I am not saying that it is optimal health care, but it is actually against the law in this country for anyone to be refused treatment for a medical condition. That is all I was saying. Do I think that people should have to depend on going to an ER, no I don't. But I also do not believe in the government plan as it is written. There are too many unknowns and too many things that are going to cost entirely too much. I just don't see it as being sustainable. Not only that, but if the "government run health care system" suddenly finds that large fries and a chocolate shake are causing obesity in this country, does that give them the right to regulate that too? Hey they are going to be wanting to reduce health care costs and obese people are draining on health care with their health problems, do they outlaw obesity? and fine people over a certain weight? No? How do you know? It is just entirely too intrusive on our liberty, sorry if you disagree, but I think it is and I won't ever agree to allowing the government to make my life decisions for me or my family. That is not what this country was founded on and I don't think that there is a better system of government than the one that our founding fathers created.
Corporal
will is correct that is what you should be aiming for the system obama put in isnt perfect but it is a step in the right direction
Command Sergeant
I think they should regulate obesity by putting taxes on the products that cause those problems.
Alcohol is bad, raise taxes.
Cigarettes are bad, raise taxes.
Fuel is bad, raise taxes.
See the pattern there?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
