Happy birthday Obamacare!!!

[rudeguy]

Don't really understand what you are saying. Not sure if your chiming in with agreement or being sarcastic at my point.

I'm saying that we already pay for people who can't afford insurance and those on disability. We pay for those people with our state and federal tax dollars. Now we have to pay more for our insurance to pay for even more people?

 

[Naeeldar]

I'm saying that we already pay for people who can't afford insurance and those on disability. We pay for those people with our state and federal tax dollars. Now we have to pay more for our insurance to pay for even more people?

Wealth redistribution.... WINNING! Sigh it drives me up the wall. I already pay a boat load in taxes... really looking forward to paying more.

 

[Doppel]

I remember laughing at this last year.

http://www.newsmax.com/Manage/Video...amacare-Will-Create-400,000-Jobs--Almost.aspx

These people know they are lying when they say these things.

 

[boomerang]

Wealth redistribution.... WINNING! Sigh it drives me up the wall. I already pay a boat load in taxes... really looking forward to paying more.

It's not even paying more that's the problem for me. If I thought increasing my taxes would go towards reducing our debt and deficits, I'd be fine with it. Instead, it will be business as usual. When they get more, they spend more. Temporary tax hikes are almost always permanent. It's not a D thing or an R thing it's a politician's thing.

Rather than make the hard choices, they prefer to raise more revenue and then spend it all. Actually in the times we're in now, it's spend it all, borrow more and spend that too.

It's got to stop. I'm tired of the creative accounting. I'm tired of them declaring they're spending less when they reduce the 25% increase in spending for (insert program here) by 1%!

I'm also tired of folks who can't see the seriousness of the financial situation we're in. People who still demand that the golden goose keep laying more and better eggs. People who ignore the math behind the trouble we're in and think that there are evil people that could make it all better if they weren't so greedy. Even though it's been pointed out time and time again that they don't have enough to make it better - even if we took it all!

But this thread is about Obamacare...

 

[Generator]

It depends when the really shitty stuff starts kicking in, like the mandate. I really wish I knew what the endgame was going to be with this reform.

 

[Zivic]

Health insruance premiums were going up before the bill was passed, might want to see what the insruance companies are doing before you blame something that came well after the problem started.

yes they were..... I saw about a 5% increase over the two yrs prior in my rates...... and a 40% increase after words.

You believe what you want, I'll believe what the numbers are saying

 

[werepossum]

The problem is that raising rates makes things less affordable rather than more affordable. The people who couldn't afford it before surely can't now. Some of the people who could afford it before can't now. Add in the fact that people with pre-existing conditions are now guaranteed insurance (but not at a reasonable rate) and you have a lot of people being thrown under the bus.

This is true of any socialist program, which is why we need to very carefully evaluate any added socialism. That doesn't by itself necessarily make any new socialism bad though, any more than gas taxes make socialism fro highways necessarily bad even though some people with marginal means will be unable to own and operate an automobile due to that incremental added cost.

I'm glad you feel that way. Feel free to go out and buy insurance for somebody if you want. Explain to me why it's good for me to have to pay for somebody else insurance? If i wanted to do that I'd do it.

And yes I know I'm a heartless sob.

To a large degree you do that now. Large pool insurance includes those with a wide range of expenses, and inevitably those with higher expenses are subsidized by those with lower expenses. That is true even for private health insurance; your cost includes a certain amount to subsidize policies for which the insurance company knows it will lose money in addition to that money for overhead and for your projected costs1.

 

[xj0hnx]

All I notice is a I pay about $250 more a month for family of 5.

I wish my wife would go back to nursing just for the insurance rather than train horses. :roll:

Sounds like you got a better deal, I pay almost $200 more for a family of three, and most doctors here are "out of network", which isn't bad this since o.o.n. is the same deductible and co pays for some reason, only hitch is I get hit on the deductible twice since my son's doctor is in, but mine is out, grrr?

 

[Doppel]

The country will continue on now until it becomes impossible for many middle class to have insurance, then it will be reset and gov-based single pay. There's no other way.

 

[IronWing]

The country will continue on now until it becomes impossible for many middle class to have insurance, then it will be reset and gov-based single pay. There's no other way.

It would be nice if we got there before the private insurance parasites destroy what is left of American competitiveness.

 

[xj0hnx]

It would be nice if we got there before the private insurance parasites destroy what is left of American competitiveness.

Blaming it all on private insurance is retarded, people need to man up and accept the responsibility they have in the trends that have led cost to be able to spiral out of control.

 

[CycloWizard]

This is true of any socialist program, which is why we need to very carefully evaluate any added socialism. That doesn't by itself necessarily make any new socialism bad though, any more than gas taxes make socialism fro highways necessarily bad even though some people with marginal means will be unable to own and operate an automobile due to that incremental added cost.

As the bottom line is raised, more and more people become marginalized and can't pay. Is the solution to keep raising the bottom line to float those below it? This has an all-too-predictable outcome, and it is bankruptcy for the nation when the bar becomes sufficiently high that the masses are supported entirely by the few, and the few decide that enough is enough. We are underway.

 

[Naeeldar]

This is true of any socialist program, which is why we need to very carefully evaluate any added socialism. That doesn't by itself necessarily make any new socialism bad though, any more than gas taxes make socialism fro highways necessarily bad even though some people with marginal means will be unable to own and operate an automobile due to that incremental added cost.


To a large degree you do that now. Large pool insurance includes those with a wide range of expenses, and inevitably those with higher expenses are subsidized by those with lower expenses. That is true even for private health insurance; your cost includes a certain amount to subsidize policies for which the insurance company knows it will lose money in addition to that money for overhead and for your projected costs1.

Except I have a good job that pays for the majority. I realize that. Again I care strictly speaking because the only change for me will to withdraw more money from my paycheck to pay for other people. I pay far more in taxes than a lot of people already. I'm almost in the worst payslot where I pay completely into social security but not over the cap.

I flat out don't like the idea of paying even more in taxes - I will be to fully fund this. Hell I'm going to be paying more nayway to help make up some of the deficit. Obamacare will just add to it.

 

[werepossum]

As the bottom line is raised, more and more people become marginalized and can't pay. Is the solution to keep raising the bottom line to float those below it? This has an all-too-predictable outcome, and it is bankruptcy for the nation when the bar becomes sufficiently high that the masses are supported entirely by the few, and the few decide that enough is enough. We are underway.

I don't disagree with any of that except that we are underway (to national bankruptcy) in any meaningful way due to the few supporting the masses. I disagree philosophically with progressive tax codes and with people outside of the bottom quintile being freed of income taxes, or especially with wealth transfer where the government takes money from one person and gifts it to another perfectly healthy but economically less desirable person, but the rich and the high earners are still doing pretty well. We're on our way to national bankruptcy because we spend far too much, not because of the strain on the wealthy and high earners.

Except I have a good job that pays for the majority. I realize that. Again I care strictly speaking because the only change for me will to withdraw more money from my paycheck to pay for other people. I pay far more in taxes than a lot of people already. I'm almost in the worst payslot where I pay completely into social security but not over the cap.

I flat out don't like the idea of paying even more in taxes - I will be to fully fund this. Hell I'm going to be paying more nayway to help make up some of the deficit. Obamacare will just add to it.

I too don't wish to pay more taxes, and I really don't like Obamacare. But I am willing to pay higher health insurance costs to provide for those poor risks (like superccs' mom) to afford health insurance. Again, Obamacare is by far from my preferred method of accomplishing this, but I accept the basic principle of charging the many a little more to provide for those who otherwise would not be able to afford health insurance.

 

[Zorkorist]

I'm against it. as so many others are, because as I think someone said above, you are free to give money to the Government, at any time, and for any purpose.

But here the Government is mandating that 21 year olds, in their prime of life, buy health insurance to subsidize other people.

It's only, and purely a tax increase, and it targets the young of our nation. Socializes them from the beginning of their life in the work place.

Pure and simple socialism.

And a tragedy.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

The trilogy that people need to worry about is Government, Insurance Companies and Lawyers.

Not Corporations.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

As the bottom line is raised, more and more people become marginalized and can't pay. Is the solution to keep raising the bottom line to float those below it? This has an all-too-predictable outcome, and it is bankruptcy for the nation when the bar becomes sufficiently high that the masses are supported entirely by the few, and the few decide that enough is enough. We are underway.

The only people raising the bottom line, are Government, Insurance Companies, and Lawyers.

Government minimum wage is what, $7.35 today?

Insurance is mandated to buy a car, or a house. What if I will accept the risk? (the definition of insurance is that it is for people that will not accept the risk... not that it is mandated.)

Lawyers: 'nough said.

-John

 

[manimal]

I'm against it. as so many others are, because as I think someone said above, you are free to give money to the Government, at any time, and for any purpose.

But here the Government is mandating that 21 year olds, in their prime of life, buy health insurance to subsidize other people.

It's only, and purely a tax increase, and it targets the young of our nation. Socializes them from the beginning of their life in the work place.

Pure and simple socialism.

And a tragedy.

-John

So when that uninsured 21 year old has a motorcycle accident and accrues over 1M in health care costs who pays for it?

Or are you advocating we leave him to die in the streets?

 

[Zorkorist]

We pay for it, of course.

It's an emergency, and of course his health is inviolate.

But, nobody can sue us (lawyers!), so our insurance cost is down.

That's all I got for you. We pay for it (sociecty) but without lawyers and insurance pemiums, his $1,000,000 bill ends up being more like $10,000. Which he has a chance to repay.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

How much does it really cost to help a 21 year old, decimated in a motorcycle accident?

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

You gonna answer that Manimal?

-John

 

[manimal]

You gonna answer that Manimal?

-John

well the costs would vary of course. From experience a friend had a bad accident after buying a sportbike and like a complete idiot ended up crashing. His bills were over 400k just for inpatient.


lawsuits amount to such a minuscule part of what we pay for insurance so your comment there is just bluster...


the real costs in the system is the uninsured. They drive up costs at hospitals since they are bound by law to care for them. If you look at costs in a state like Hawaii which has a robust care system for the poor their hospital costs are much more in line...


Do you realize that with the new health care law our pools mandate 80 percent of our premiums have to go towards health care?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/health/policy/22insure.html


I may not like much of the law and would have preferred medicare for all this is at least a step in the right direction...

 

[Zorkorist]

Lawsuits, and the reulting insurance from lawsuits are huge costs in the medical profession today, and the reason that an ambulance ride can cost $10,000 when a cab ride would cost $20.

What's truly sick, is that one cannot opt out from the system. You are mandated to pay $1,000,000 for an ambulance ride.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Do you realize that the decamated Motorcycle rider is going to get help from a doctor, and early responders, and people at the accident scene?

It's not rocket science.

-John

 

[_GTech]

I'd like to make bill, it's funny they call them bills because Americans end up footing the bill 9 times out of 10, anyway, in this bill I'd like to create a department who would slam any Government worker for accepting money to make a decision, why?

It's called polluting justice & treason.

With all that hate out of my heart, this Obama Care package isn't a solution, furthermore, doesn't anyone take lessons in history? If you try to control the corporation they will simply charge more, somewhere, and in the case of insurance, it's going to be your deductible or fees.

Nevertheless, even if this bill is all that and a bag of chips, you only forgot one thing Obama, those people making <= $12/hour, they can't afford health care, and that's not even considering the homeless and jobless which are what millions now? I wonder how many millions make less than $12/hour too...

So, when your done talking about this, yet another FAIL, you guys can write your representatives and tell them, if they don't end it now, they will only destroy the economy further as hundreds of thousands of small businesses say "Hmph" and close up shop...

Or in case you weren't in touch with Main Street, there isn't one, people don't shop anywhere but WalMart, they can't afford anything else!

Good job passing treasonous bills which only put money in your pockets you corporate sellouts!

When people gonna learn, they don't care and Socialism is a fail. Or can't you tell yet?

Anti-corporate activists (see activism) believe that the influence of large business corporations poses a threat to the public good and democratic authority. These corporations, they believe, are invading people's privacy, manipulating politics and governments, and creating false needs in consumers.

Furthermore we believe these corporations are putting $ in government's pockets to get bills past in favor of them and they are pushing to get legislation which will fatten their pockets by putting unnecessary strain on the American Public. We also believe that it's treason to accept money to do your people wrong too.

Is there going to be an end to these Corporate Politics?