Obamacare's effect on the middle class

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
anyways this is a pretty misleading article, largely around the incredibly misleading and vague term 'middle class' which in this case appears to be used in the old british sense of the word, not the pluralistic american sense. A single earner earning 85k is a very nice income in most areas and firmly upper middle class.

bullshit. That's squarely middle class. It's a factory workers wage, so are you trying to say a factory work is upper middle class?

$40/hour is a factory workers wage? I don't think so.

AHAHAHA oh that kills me too

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

How in the fuck do you come up with this load of shit from what I posted?

 

[shadow9d9]

Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

How in the fuck do you come up with this load of shit from what I posted?

How do I come up with what? You were the first one in this thread to try to blame the GOP (and the "renegade" Blue Dogs too) for the failure of the public option, and act as if they are dictating the direction of this debate, forcing Obama to eliminate the public option. At least that was how I read your post.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

This is what you spout day after day after day. We need better handling of pre-existing conditions. But the insurance care many of us are getting is perfectly fine and will be better than what the government can ever provide us...

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

Why should we care what someone who doesn't even bother to vote thinks?

And why should we care what someone who doesn't know what the definition of "decision" thinks?

Because I vote and my vote can possibly be influenced. You on the other hand don't vote so who cares wyhat your opinion is?

Unless of course you're just a lying piece of shit??

:shocked:

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: spidey07
Marked before the moonbats start attacking the source of the research and totally dismissing the facts. These facts are coming from a PWC analysis.

You mean the facts that this estimate is based upon the fact that there is no public option to drive down costs?

Glad you now suppor the public option spidey. Do all conservatives feel this way? What are we fighting over? Welcome aboard!

No public option, no outrageous price increases and theft of your hard earned money to support deadbeats.

FOADT You already are doing just that you're just too dumb to know it.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

hi!

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jonks
You mean the facts that this estimate is based upon the fact that there is no public option to drive down costs?

our .gov is already spending more per capita than either the government of the UK or germany. why the fuck would tossing more money on the pile 'drive down costs?'

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

Why should we care what someone who doesn't even bother to vote thinks?

And why should we care what someone who doesn't know what the definition of "decision" thinks?

Because I vote and my vote can possibly be influenced. You on the other hand don't vote so who cares wyhat your opinion is?

Unless of course you're just a lying piece of shit??

:shocked:

Thank you for proving my point, once again. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. Except in your case, the fish are smarter.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

Why should we care what someone who doesn't even bother to vote thinks?

And why should we care what someone who doesn't know what the definition of "decision" thinks?

Because I vote and my vote can possibly be influenced. You on the other hand don't vote so who cares wyhat your opinion is?

Unless of course you're just a lying piece of shit??

:shocked:

Thank you for proving my point, once again. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. Except in your case, the fish are smarter.

You prove my point everytime you post on this political forum You claim not to vote so IMO you're either a lying piece of shit or an idiot. Maybe both? I don't really care.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

Why should we care what someone who doesn't even bother to vote thinks?

And why should we care what someone who doesn't know what the definition of "decision" thinks?

Because I vote and my vote can possibly be influenced. You on the other hand don't vote so who cares wyhat your opinion is?

Unless of course you're just a lying piece of shit??

:shocked:

Thank you for proving my point, once again. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. Except in your case, the fish are smarter.

You prove my point everytime you post on this political forum You claim not to vote so IMO you're either a lying piece of shit or an idiot. Maybe both? I don't really care.

The only idiot is you, since you can't seem to discuss things without resorting to name calling, or put together cogent arguments without the aforementioned name calling.

You're just upset because the public option will likely be dumped and you didn't get your way, your "influenced" vote be damned.

 

[bfdd]

Miketheidiot is right, you guys can't compare single earner to household. On the other hand the person who said "people who make 200K+ say they can barely get by" if they used their money to get into a more expensive area to live then you start taxing them more you're going to make it hard for them to live where they currently are. That's ridiculous imo.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

This is what you spout day after day after day. We need better handling of pre-existing conditions. But the insurance care many of us are getting is perfectly fine and will be better than what the government can ever provide us...

Wait until you lose your job, i wonder if you would feel the same way?

 

[Athena]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
our .gov is already spending more per capita than either the government of the UK or germany. why the fuck would tossing more money on the pile 'drive down costs?'

No, the "government" is not spending more per capita or as a percentage of GDP than those countries, our economy is. And there is evidence that building a national health care policy around private, for-profit insurance is a major factor for that fact.

I am 100% in favor of having a single health plan for every citizen in the country. There are different ways to accomplish that but what will not work, is to cling to a model that has driven us where we are now.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

This is what you spout day after day after day. We need better handling of pre-existing conditions. But the insurance care many of us are getting is perfectly fine and will be better than what the government can ever provide us...

Wait until you lose your job, i wonder if you would feel the same way?

COBRA!

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: ElFenix
our .gov is already spending more per capita than either the government of the UK or germany. why the fuck would tossing more money on the pile 'drive down costs?'

No, the "government" is not spending more per capita or as a percentage of GDP than those countries, our economy is. And there is evidence that building a national health care policy around private, for-profit insurance is a major factor for that fact.

I am 100% in favor of having a single health plan for every citizen in the country. There are different ways to accomplish that but what will not work, is to cling to a model that has driven us where we are now.

That's my biggest problem with what has been trying to get pushed through. Nothing changes except who pays part of our tab. I'm not a big fan of UHC, but if that's what the majority of the people want, it needs to be tackled a very different way than what they are trying to do. Top to bottom change needs to occur.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: ElFenix
our .gov is already spending more per capita than either the government of the UK or germany. why the fuck would tossing more money on the pile 'drive down costs?'

No, the "government" is not spending more per capita or as a percentage of GDP than those countries, our economy is. And there is evidence that building a national health care policy around private, for-profit insurance is a major factor for that fact.

I am 100% in favor of having a single health plan for every citizen in the country. There are different ways to accomplish that but what will not work, is to cling to a model that has driven us where we are now.

Sure it will!! What's the problem with the Insurance companies raping everyone raw and laughing all the way to the bank? I really don't see how a 400% increase in profits in the last ten years would do this.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: ElFenix
our .gov is already spending more per capita than either the government of the UK or germany. why the fuck would tossing more money on the pile 'drive down costs?'

No, the "government" is not spending more per capita or as a percentage of GDP than those countries, our economy is. And there is evidence that building a national health care policy around private, for-profit insurance is a major factor for that fact.

I am 100% in favor of having a single health plan for every citizen in the country. There are different ways to accomplish that but what will not work, is to cling to a model that has driven us where we are now.

That's my biggest problem with what has been trying to get pushed through. Nothing changes except who pays part of our tab. I'm not a big fan of UHC, but if that's what the majority of the people want, it needs to be tackled a very different way than what they are trying to do. Top to bottom change needs to occur.

Top to bottom change would be nice but the problem is the assholes in Congress who LOVE the status quo which is bankrupting this country.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: Ausm
You can blame the GOP and conservative Dems that are bought off by lobbyists for shitcanning the public option.

Of course you can, because whatever the GOP says, Obama must do. :roll:

I have an idea -- why not craft a plan that works for everyone AND holds up to budgetary scrutiny? Or maybe unify your party so the GOP can't stop your plans?

And you win, by the way -- when I saw the thread, I thought to myself: "I wonder who will be the first lefty to blame the GOP." Congratulations.

Why should we care what someone who doesn't even bother to vote thinks?

And why should we care what someone who doesn't know what the definition of "decision" thinks?

Because I vote and my vote can possibly be influenced. You on the other hand don't vote so who cares wyhat your opinion is?

Unless of course you're just a lying piece of shit??

:shocked:

Thank you for proving my point, once again. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. Except in your case, the fish are smarter.

You prove my point everytime you post on this political forum You claim not to vote so IMO you're either a lying piece of shit or an idiot. Maybe both? I don't really care.

The only idiot is you, since you can't seem to discuss things without resorting to name calling, or put together cogent arguments without the aforementioned name calling.

You're just upset because the public option will likely be dumped and you didn't get your way, your "influenced" vote be damned.

Apparently you're one of those who can dish out but can't take it. LMAO@U, you are so entertaining. Just keep digging your hole, I find it rather amusing. I especailly am enjoying your hang-up with name calling today. Yesterday it my spelling/ grammer. Anything to try and discredit the messenger. You really are all hat and no horse.... apart from that "one trick pony" that id. :laugh:

Now, shouoldn't you get your ass back to work at that high paying job you were bragging about yesterday?? :laugh:

Or was that just another of your e-penis lies, Mr. Internet Tough Guy?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Insurance companies need to be dismantled and we need full single payer. These scumbags need to be torn apart.

This is what you spout day after day after day. We need better handling of pre-existing conditions. But the insurance care many of us are getting is perfectly fine and will be better than what the government can ever provide us...

Wait until you lose your job, i wonder if you would feel the same way?

COBRA!

You show your short sightedness. Many, many people these days lose their jobs due to health problems and with the cost of health care can't get rehired anyplace so when their COBRA runs out they're shit outta luck.

Of course, what do you know, you think factory workers make $40/hour?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Athena
No, the "government" is not spending more per capita or as a percentage of GDP than those countries, our economy is.

click me!

look under "Per capita government expenditure on health at average exchange rate (US$) ?"

Germany 2790.0 2005
United Kingdom 2668.0 2005
United States of America 2862.0 2005

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

I'm going to make a big but reasonable assumption: America's employers will choose to drop their coverage for employees. That's an option granted them under the legislation.

It is a big assumption. It's also an option granted to employers in the absence of legislation...

Employers are likely to choose the "pay" option, because their health-care costs are rising far faster than their payrolls, and they'd reap big savings by eliminating the administrative costs of providing benefits.

Costs are also increasing relative to payrolls in the absence of legislation, and they could also "reap big savings by eliminating the administrative costs of providing benefits" in the absence of legislation.

I won't comment yet one way or another, but it already looks pretty clear that this author is doing a poor job of isolating phenomena unique to passage of HR 3200 or the Chairman's mark.

Nor does he do a great job of comparing outcomes with legislation vs. outcomes without legislation. That is, he doesn't say, "If HR 3200 passes, middle class families could end up paying $xxxx more than they do now in a worst-case scenario. If HR 3200 doesn't pass, middle class families could end up paying $yyyy more than they do now in a worst-case scenario. $xxxx is more/less than $yyyy." Why that comparison matters

I was going to jump on this "assumption" too.

Why would corporations suddenly drop coverage of their employees merely because the health care bill passed? Those same companies are free to drop coverage RIGHT NOW and pay NOTHING. But Tully tells us that those same corporations will gladly pay 8% to the government for the privilege of dropping coverage under the House bill??!!

Not to mention: Company's offer perqs in part to attract and retain good employees. That motivation won't go out the window simply because health care reform passes, and any company that shafts its employees in this way is gong to see a mass exodus.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: bfdd
Miketheidiot is right, you guys can't compare single earner to household. On the other hand the person who said "people who make 200K+ say they can barely get by" if they used their money to get into a more expensive area to live then you start taxing them more you're going to make it hard for them to live where they currently are. That's ridiculous imo.

This.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Apparently you're one of those who can dish out but can't take it. LMAO@U, you are so entertaining. Just keep digging your hole, I find it rather amusing. I especailly am enjoying your hang-up with name calling today. Yesterday it my spelling/ grammer. Anything to try and discredit the messenger. You really are all hat and no horse.... apart from that "one trick pony" that id. :laugh:

Now, shouoldn't you get your ass back to work at that high paying job you were bragging about yesterday?? :laugh:

Or was that just another of your e-penis lies, Mr. Internet Tough Guy?

Wow, time to take that medicine. Internet Tough Guy? Wow, you might just be the most delusional poster on these forums, and that is saying quite a bit. Internet Tough Guy, let's see...you threatened me yesterday. Who is the ITG? LOL, all words and nothing to back it up. Threatening me with violence yesterday and then accusing me of being an ITG. A coward threatening me behind the anonymity of the internet. That, sir, is the definition of an ITG. I have not threatened you in the slightest.

And what hole would I be digging? My name calling "hang up" isn't just today, nor am I the only one to mention it in regards to you. When you have to resort to name calling, it shows your lack of class and cognitive ability to discuss things in a rational manner. No surprise with your track record and your other lies in various threads.

Unlike you, I don't lie. I also don't needlessly call people names which is comical considering you were the one who was bringing up manners yesterday. You can disagree with me all you want -- great. If you disagree, outline your arguments. Maybe I am wrong and another point of view will help me understand. That is the mature way to deal with things.

By the way, I will take your advice and vote next time even if I despise both candidates. I will vote for myself next time.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

I'm going to make a big but reasonable assumption: America's employers will choose to drop their coverage for employees. That's an option granted them under the legislation.

It is a big assumption. It's also an option granted to employers in the absence of legislation...

Employers are likely to choose the "pay" option, because their health-care costs are rising far faster than their payrolls, and they'd reap big savings by eliminating the administrative costs of providing benefits.

Costs are also increasing relative to payrolls in the absence of legislation, and they could also "reap big savings by eliminating the administrative costs of providing benefits" in the absence of legislation.

I won't comment yet one way or another, but it already looks pretty clear that this author is doing a poor job of isolating phenomena unique to passage of HR 3200 or the Chairman's mark.

Nor does he do a great job of comparing outcomes with legislation vs. outcomes without legislation. That is, he doesn't say, "If HR 3200 passes, middle class families could end up paying $xxxx more than they do now in a worst-case scenario. If HR 3200 doesn't pass, middle class families could end up paying $yyyy more than they do now in a worst-case scenario. $xxxx is more/less than $yyyy." Why that comparison matters

I was going to jump on this "assumption" too.

Why would corporations suddenly drop coverage of their employees merely because the health care bill passed? Those same companies are free to drop coverage RIGHT NOW and pay NOTHING. But Tully tells us that those same corporations will gladly pay 8% to the government for the privilege of dropping coverage under the House bill??!!

Not to mention: Company's offer perqs in part to attract and retain good employees. That motivation won't go out the window simply because health care reform passes, and any company that shafts its employees in this way is gong to see a mass exodus.

Most blue collar workers are used to getting shafted especially when it comes to health insurance.