^ this is where those evil "minimum standards" for insurance plans come in, those standards that anti-reform people here claim prove Obama is lying about being able to keep your current plan.
I would love to know what percentage of people making more than 100k a year are without health insurance currently. Nothing is perfect, but this hardly seems to be a show stopper, sorry.
Big taxes are also ahead if this nightmare of a power grab ever passes.
"The Baucus healthcare bill provides for a tax on ?gold-plated? health insurance policies. But, as with the Alternative Minimum Tax, once slated to be imposed only on the wealthy, inflation will make most Americans liable to pay the 40 percent tax in a few years.
The tax applies to all individual policies with premiums above $8,750 and families of four whose premiums exceed $23,000. But the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the average health insurance premium for families of four will reach $25,000 by 2018. The average premium should pass the thresholds in Baucus?s bill by 2016.
So, a few years after the bill takes effect in 2013, the health insurance premium tax will become virtually universal. And this tax is to be a 40 percent levy. So, in six years, the average family health insurance policy, now projected to cost $25,000, will, in fact, cost $35,000 due to the Obama-Baucus tax!..
Until now, the Obama plan has not meant much for the average American who now has insurance. While scarcity of doctors and medical care is a likely result, the harm was largely confined to the elderly, who will bear the brunt of the rationing. But now, the Baucus bill shows that the real story is quite different. In a few years? time, most families will find their health insurance premiums 40 percent higher because of the new tax. Far from cutting the cost of health insurance, the bill will send it through the roof!"
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog...-soon-to-all-policies/
"The Baucus healthcare bill provides for a tax on ?gold-plated? health insurance policies. But, as with the Alternative Minimum Tax, once slated to be imposed only on the wealthy, inflation will make most Americans liable to pay the 40 percent tax in a few years.
The tax applies to all individual policies with premiums above $8,750 and families of four whose premiums exceed $23,000. But the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the average health insurance premium for families of four will reach $25,000 by 2018. The average premium should pass the thresholds in Baucus?s bill by 2016.
So, a few years after the bill takes effect in 2013, the health insurance premium tax will become virtually universal. And this tax is to be a 40 percent levy. So, in six years, the average family health insurance policy, now projected to cost $25,000, will, in fact, cost $35,000 due to the Obama-Baucus tax!..
Until now, the Obama plan has not meant much for the average American who now has insurance. While scarcity of doctors and medical care is a likely result, the harm was largely confined to the elderly, who will bear the brunt of the rationing. But now, the Baucus bill shows that the real story is quite different. In a few years? time, most families will find their health insurance premiums 40 percent higher because of the new tax. Far from cutting the cost of health insurance, the bill will send it through the roof!"
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog...-soon-to-all-policies/
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Jail time would be stupid. It should be community service time somewere in the health care industry.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
Sheeesh!
This dumbass argument against an insurance mandate is epic fail!
1. People without enough income to pay taxes will get free healthcare just like they do now
2. People with sufficient income who provide proof of insurance with thier taxes will get a "tax credit", people that have sufficient income but don't have insurance will pay higher taxes
3.The number of people going to jail for not paying taxes will be statistically very small
I find it sad that you guys will go to the nth degree to defend the right to be totally irresponsible at somebody elses expense, but yet you don't seem concerned about the multitudes of people currently suffering through medicially induced bankruptcy, or a system where 1/2 the people pay for the other halfs irresponsibility.
The example of the poor family with over $100k in income, and they would go broke if they had to pay for insurance because of thier finances, BOO FUCKING HOO! This kind of attitude makes me want to puke. I've worked most of my career supporting a family and making less than that and always had insurance and have paid ever increasing premiums because of freeloading asswipes like you describe
This dumbass argument against an insurance mandate is epic fail!
1. People without enough income to pay taxes will get free healthcare just like they do now
2. People with sufficient income who provide proof of insurance with thier taxes will get a "tax credit", people that have sufficient income but don't have insurance will pay higher taxes
3.The number of people going to jail for not paying taxes will be statistically very small
I find it sad that you guys will go to the nth degree to defend the right to be totally irresponsible at somebody elses expense, but yet you don't seem concerned about the multitudes of people currently suffering through medicially induced bankruptcy, or a system where 1/2 the people pay for the other halfs irresponsibility.
The example of the poor family with over $100k in income, and they would go broke if they had to pay for insurance because of thier finances, BOO FUCKING HOO! This kind of attitude makes me want to puke. I've worked most of my career supporting a family and making less than that and always had insurance and have paid ever increasing premiums because of freeloading asswipes like you describe
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
The point is that ANYONE going to jail for electing not to have health insurance seems rather draconian in nature.
Nor is this totally being irresponsible at sombody elses expense. This could equally viewed as asking many healthy people to pay for others, who are often irresponsible, at their expense.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
I'm sorry, but anybody regardless of age, health or how bullet proof they think they are is irresponsible if they don't have health insurance. This is selfish and shortsided in a couple of ways, if your not so bullet proof and have a major accident or illness while your young "healthy" and uninsured why should we premium payers have to pay for your care? And if you are lucky enough to make it to your older years how is it fair that I pay in premiums for 40yrs and you pay in for 5-10yrs and expect the same treatment?
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
So if someone has unexpected hardships they are asswipes. What a dipshit you are as if you have all the answers. Well sometimes people get royally screwed in a number of ways and that's how it is. You? You say fuckem. Let them rot, and have a new class of criminal.
In the spirit of Marie Antoinette, the government is going to screw the middle class uninsured and typically people are going to say "hurrah". Nice.
and a big fuck you
I'm paying $300 a fucking month for insurance and they don't pay a fucking dime.
The system is a sham and scam and fuck you for supporting it.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
It's not a stupid move at all. No matter what health care reforms are proposed, they are always (ALWAYS) met with this sort of opposition. A quick read on the history of health care reform will show you this. So if the Democrats were interested in reforming the health care system at all, they had to deal with this. Since good governance is based around implementing your agenda that you believe will be the best thing for the nation, and not winning the next election, I'm happy for it... and it most certainly isn't a 'stupid, stupid, stupid move'.
You aren't alone in making predictions for an election more than a year from now, and I don't care what you base it on... it's a fool's errand. Death knell my ass.
You're making quite a few very strong statements about this bill, I'm wondering what you are basing them on. Do you know the mechanism by which the insurance mandate will be implemented? Do you know to what income level subsidies exist up to? Do you know iif there are hardship exemptions? I don't see how you could, as that hasn't been finalized. It appears as if you've filled in the blanks with something you don't like, and I'm not sure why.
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 29,160
- 14,527
- 136
There is not an eye roll large enough to express how much I roll my eyes at this, so I'll settle for :roll:
All of these bills use Medicaid to extend private insurance coverage. Journalists, most of whom know nothing whatsoever about Medicaid, tell us that subsidies will be based on some multiplier of the official poverty line. What they don't tell us is that exactly who is eligible for Medicaid coverage is determined by state law. That means for example, that in 42 states, adults without children will not be covered at all. It also means that income is only the first level of qualification; anyone with assets has to "spend down" before qualifying. It also means that once the qualified applicants obtain coverage, their charges will be subject to the lower payment rates of Medicaid...which many doctors simply cannot afford to accept.
This is the problem with focusing on insurance coverage and treating universal care as a poverty program. If we were really interested in increasing care to people who cannot afford it now (including many who do in fact have insurance), we would be talking about REFORMATION of the financing model, not extension of private insurance.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter