here is what you will be fined (TAXED) for not having health insurance

[umbrella39]

I have not seen any data that supports your rant.

And the cost of out of insurance healthcare, should you have to pay it, is artificially high thanks to all the tax subsidized insured.

What did I type that required data? Data that shows that sometimes healthy, employed people who are offered health care at their jobs opt out? Data that shows that sometimes people don't pay their hospital bills?

What does anything I said have to do with tax subsidized insured anyhow? That's a different topic. I have just as big a problem with medicaid moms abusing the ER because they know it's free. I wish we could turn away all the non-emergencies they bring their asses in with instead of going to urgent care or gasp... waiting until tomorrow and going to see their primary care Dr and wasting our time. That's a huge drain indeed and a different topic I could go off on for hours.

But I'm talking about personal responsibility and paying ones debts now. I am talking about good portion of society that claim to be moral yet thinking it's OK to roll the dice and screw the hospital when they get sick/hurt. I'm asking why people feel they should be paid for their work but not us. These are the first people who get indignant when you propose the be forced to buy insurance because they know we can't legally turn them away at the ER and we can't make them pay up. I'm saying people shouldn't be able to have their cake and eat it too. If someone is not OK with being forced to buy insurance then why should we be forced to treat them.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Funny how conservatives don't give a shit about people undergoing terrible hardships, being uninsured, unable to see doctors for simple everyday things, and taking a "screw you, I got mine" attitude. But when there's a possibility of those same people being taxed, all of a sudden it's a travesty.

 

[sportage]

To all concerned about the subject.

Just buy the damn insurance.

I'm sure u buy car insurance. Right?
If you hit my car u better damn well have auto insurance.
And if you fall off a ladder ending up in the ER you better damn well have health insurance BECAUSE I'm damn well not paying your ER bill. Not any more.

Just buy the damn insurance.
Then you won't have to worry about fees or fines.
And grow up.

After all... This whole idea WAS a republican idea.
So don't believe for one minute voting republican will get you off the hook.
This is not a democratic idea nor republican idea.
Not any more......

It's comin. U know its comin. We all know it's comin.
Who or which party is in power matters not one iota.

Just buy the damn insurance....

 

[Cerb]

Except that car insurance can usually be had fairly cheap, and it can be possible to do without a car, if you can move easily. I shopped around, and got mine for under $40/mo, down from about $70/mo, for nowhere near minimum coverage, and $70/mo is still way better than health insurance. Last time I tried getting health insurance, I couldn't find anything remotely suitable under $180/mo.

 

[mattpegher]

Except that car insurance can usually be had fairly cheap, and it can be possible to do without a car, if you can move easily. I shopped around, and got mine for under $40/mo, down from about $70/mo, for nowhere near minimum coverage, and $70/mo is still way better than health insurance. Last time I tried getting health insurance, I couldn't find anything remotely suitable under $180/mo.

Yet as you illustrate, competition between companies (many companies) has limited the cost of car insurance. No one has yet to tell me why car insurance carriers can survive without "group rates" and the risk averaging that seems to be vital for health insurance companies.
The biggest claim of the health insurance companies is that without group rates they cant manage the risk. I have always insisted that this is a lie, propagated to minimize competition. The proof is actually in the NIH published numbers that state that for every 1 dollar of money paid to insurance companies, only 66 cents is paid out to providers. That is a rediculous percentage for what is essentially a financial product.

Of course they claim more modest profits but when you divest those profits with internal expenses, which are ultimately unnecessary, of course your published profits are lower (yet still better than any other insurance product).

Healthcare in this country is not broken, healthcare financing is.
When a patient is hemorraging from a wound in their chest and has a bug bite on the thumb, I dont put a band aid on thier thumb and expect it to save them.

 

[episodic]

I personally love the 'can insure your kid till 26' provision. Personally, I was counting the days till I could drop my kid off my insurance. 26? I'll cover him till he grads from college - and that better be before 26.

 

[cybrsage]

No one has yet to tell me why car insurance carriers can survive without "group rates" and the risk averaging that seems to be vital for health insurance companies.

Most likely due to the massive costs involved. Most of the treatments for life ending diseases cost in the millions of dollars. Most major car accidents do not even come close to that cost.

That said, car insurance companies have different rates based on age of the driver...which is vital to the health of the industry.

 

[cybrsage]

But I'm talking about personal responsibility and paying ones debts now. I am talking about good portion of society that claim to be moral yet thinking it's OK to roll the dice and screw the hospital when they get sick/hurt. I'm asking why people feel they should be paid for their work but not us.

Out of curiosity, do you pirate software / music?

If someone is not OK with being forced to buy insurance then why should we be forced to treat them.

Agreed.

 

[tweaker2]

n/m

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Most likely due to the massive costs involved. Most of the treatments for life ending diseases cost in the millions of dollars. Most major car accidents do not even come close to that cost.

That said, car insurance companies have different rates based on age of the driver...which is vital to the health of the industry.

Whats being pointedly ignored is things like the reason that medicare costs so much is that chronically ill and doomed patients demand and get fantastically expensive treatment such that they account for significantly more than half of all costs. Of course we won't talk about that. Just have faith in Obama.

 

[mattpegher]

Most likely due to the massive costs involved. Most of the treatments for life ending diseases cost in the millions of dollars. Most major car accidents do not even come close to that cost.

That said, car insurance companies have different rates based on age of the driver...which is vital to the health of the industry.

Oh, I agree that your insurance should be rated according to age, which it already is. (at least for the subscriber). I think the main difference is that auto insurance is a true insurance policy. You dont use it unless something bad happens, large numbers of people never use it. A small percentage use it for accidents ranging in the $20-30K, range and a very few use it for claims in the millions. With health care,few use it not at all, the vast majority use it for bills < $500, a smaller but still large number use it for bills in the 20-30K range and a still significant number use it for 100-500K range. The million dollar tx are quite rare.

There are policies out there that are insurance products, linked to HSA to allow for tax deductable health expenses (under the 7% IRS amount). These are the plans you would buy if you were aware of the money you pay and keep.

 

[WackyDan]

Funny how conservatives don't give a shit about people undergoing terrible hardships, being uninsured, unable to see doctors for simple everyday things, and taking a "screw you, I got mine" attitude. But when there's a possibility of those same people being taxed, all of a sudden it's a travesty.

Please.... the additional 32 million being added to Medicaid aren't being taxed.

 

[Cerb]

Please.... the additional 32 million being added to Medicaid aren't being taxed.

Isn't 32 million based on the numbers prior to the court's decision? IE, an unrealistically optimistic number?

 

[EagleKeeper]

I personally love the 'can insure your kid till 26' provision. Personally, I was counting the days till I could drop my kid off my insurance. 26? I'll cover him till he grads from college - and that better be before 26.

You can insure - you do not have to.

 

[shadow9d9]

Your taxes just got jacked by a trillion dollars over the next 10 years, thanks to the progressives. The only logical option is to vote out the idiots that brought us this nightmare and vote in someone who will get rid of it.

Your taxes just got jacked by 3 trillion due to 2 foreign occupations. At least this trillion has benefits like no lifetime cap, no pre-existing conditions, etc.

 

[shadow9d9]

Well, when 40 million new "customers" get added, and yet the supply of primary care physicians does not increase, guess what happens? Yup, no more primary care physicians for you. If you want an appointment you'll wait 10 months, and they'll treat you like dirt because they'll have plenty of 'customers' no matter what they do.

More people going to the Dr. is a bad thing. Right... Better that they go to the ER!

 

[shadow9d9]

We'll have to pass the bill to find out what's in it. Good times.

You can thank the republicans and death panels for your lack of understanding of it.

 

[nehalem256]

Please.... the additional 32 million being added to Medicaid aren't being taxed.

Funny how adding 32 million to medicaid is suppose to cut down on "freeloaders"

 

[shadow9d9]

Have fun paying! According to your messiah, I won't be paying a dime extra and I have a Cadillac plan.

The only Messiah is Reagan by the republicans. projection at its finest!

Oh, and you do pay HUGE for your cadillac plan.. right out of your salary... because instead of money, you get to pay hugely for health insurance!

 

[cybrsage]

More people going to the Dr. is a bad thing. Right... Better that they go to the ER!

Apparently the dems think so. They are fining companies that provide cadillac plans since people who PAY for their services will use a lot of services if their personal portion is low - even though the insurance company pays the full price required and the business pays the rest of the expensive insurance costs...

So yeah, the dems do think more people going to the Dr. is a bad thing.

 

[cybrsage]

A Newsweek/Daily Beast poll:

Overall, 50 percent of those polled said they disapprove of the court&#8217;s 5&#8211;4 decision, while 45 percent said they support it. Consistently, a majority of voters said that they oppose the individual mandate (53 percent); believe taxes will increase (52 percent); believe their personal health-care costs will increase (56 percent); and disapprove of Obama&#8217;s handling of health care in general (58 percent). Only 24 percent of those polled said that they believe the ruling will make the country better off.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...dislike-supreme-court-s-obamacare-ruling.html

 

[shadow9d9]

Apparently the dems think so. They are fining companies that provide cadillac plans since people who PAY for their services will use a lot of services if their personal portion is low - even though the insurance company pays the full price required and the business pays the rest of the expensive insurance costs...

So yeah, the dems do think more people going to the Dr. is a bad thing.

What does this have to do with the post I was responding to? Just more deflection?

The person was complaining that too many people would see Drs. I say that that is a good thing.

Who cares what the "dems" think? How is that relevant to my response?

 

[shadow9d9]

A Newsweek/Daily Beast poll:


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...dislike-supreme-court-s-obamacare-ruling.html

Have you seen the numbers on how many people actually know the the bill does? Or how many people love what is IN the bill, but not the bill itself? Yeah, people are ignorant... they always will be.. but "death panels" and other lies don't help.

Let's look at the approval rating of Mass, which already HAS it implemented... Instead of deciding based on the lies of republican politicians, they are forming their opinion of the law that has actually been in effect, and therefore they actually know about it firsthand.

 

[cybrsage]

Have you seen the numbers on how many people actually know the the bill does? Or how many people love what is IN the bill, but not the bill itself? Yeah, people are ignorant... they always will be.. but "death panels" and other lies don't help.

Let's look at the approval rating of Mass, which already HAS it implemented...

Do you actually think taxes will NOT go up due to the ACA? They already have for the lower middle class and the poor...

 

[cybrsage]

What does this have to do with the post I was responding to? Just more deflection?

The person was complaining that too many people would see Drs. I say that that is a good thing.

Who cares what the "dems" think? How is that relevant to my response?

The dems wrote the ACA and passed it - they are VERY relevant to the ACA. Those who wrote the ACA feel that people going to the Dr. more is a bad thing...it is their line of reasoning as to why they are going to fine companies that make it cheap and easy to do.