- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 29, 2012 at 10:27 pm #603798
JanSParticipanttwo different links…one “official”…one “unofficial”..I will admit that there’s a lot I don’t know about it…
June 29, 2012 at 11:32 pm #762320
JanSParticipantto continue a little further, I guess I’m astounded about the things that I’m seeing online…that those over 65 are all going to be implanted with micro chips, the idea that is still out there about there being death panels, things like that. We all need to educate ourselves about this, so we can advocate for ourselves. The one thing that has really given me a laugh is…people who say they are fed up with the US policies and going to move to Canada – lol..what a surprise they’re in for. And some want to cut education? Boggles my mind.
June 30, 2012 at 12:09 am #762321
kootchmanMemberwho’s moving to Canada? I’ll stay and fight. I don’t want to cut education. It’s the future of our country. I want it reformed, effective and worthy of the money we spend it on.
June 30, 2012 at 12:39 am #762322
JanSParticipantoh, but some are saying that, perhaps not you, but some.. Just like Rush Limbaugh said that if the ACA goes through, in 5 years he’d move to Costa Rica…guess what? they have universal health care…surprise, surprise…
June 30, 2012 at 6:41 am #762323
HMC RichParticipantI have to read it before I know what is in it. Deja Vu? Maybe I’ll read it at Deja Vu.
I am trying to get my head around how Justice Roberts made not buying insurance a tax. In fact this “mandate” (so masculine) was originally sold as not a tax, otherwise it would not have made it through the Democratically controlled congress at the time. But I suppose since the IRS will be the enforcers, it had to be a tax, otherwise why would the IRS be involved.
Getting taxed for inactivity. With this reasoning I can now get taxed for NOT losing weight. I can get taxed for not working. I can get taxed for just about anything I am not doing if congress decides to act in such a way.
Will we get taxed for not thinking? I know politics taxes my brain, but now I have to worry if I have to pay that tax.
Maybe the Mayans were right about 2012. Hmmmm.
June 30, 2012 at 6:53 am #762324
kootchmanMemberHMCRich …. it’s not a tax.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdgPauuMmJI
see?
Maybe it’s a stalking horse? Roberts wants to put liberalism back up in the marquee lights … tax and spend. I am going to have to change.. I used to say if it moves, glitters, or is visible, someone will try and tax it. Hell, now all they have to do is sit in the office and imagine it.
June 30, 2012 at 6:57 am #762325
kootchmanMemberSay Jan… Russia has universal healthcare, has more doctors and healthcare workers per capita than any of the G-8 countries…. and their mortality rates are rising faster than any country in the G-20.
Seems a healthy economy is more conducive to health than access.
Jobs. Economic growth. lifestyle choices… the trifecta of good health and lower health care costs.
June 30, 2012 at 7:04 am #762326
dobroParticipantRoberts did not say its a tax. He said the Gov’t is using its taxing authority (granted by the constitution) to exact a penalty on those who don’t have health insurance. This penalty is only levied on those with enough money to buy insurance, but who fail to do so. If you’re too poor to buy insurance you’ll get a subsidy. So the only people paying the penalty will be freeloaders who have enough money to buy insurance but don’t, figuring they’ll get free care at the emergency room if they need it.
In other words, for the Republicans out there, those who fail to take personal responsibility for their health care will be penalized so the rest of us don’t pay for their “free” care in higher premiums. Romneycare, you know, the Republican governor that did the same thing in MA which is now leading to lower premiums and nearly universal coverage…the guy that’s running for Prez against the exact thing he put into place…remember that?
June 30, 2012 at 7:56 am #762327
JanSParticipantI see someone come on here and call for less gov’t. in our lives, and then someone else comes on and says “everyone should have insurance. No insurance, no medical help? People agree with said person all over the place…and then we’re told that the ACA says you have to have insurance,otherwise you’re gonna pay a fine…and everyone says…oh, no, we can’t have that…that’s a friggin’ tax. So..which way do you want it?
Kootch..almost everyone in the world has universal health care except us. People who say they are gonna move to Canada have no clue that Canada already has socialized medicine. They’re just too stoopid to know it. That was my point. Russia has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.
People are pissed off at Roberts because he actually acted like a Supreme Court Judge instead of a conservative politician.The side that appointed him actually thought that he would be loyal and side with them. Lesson learned, I suppose.
June 30, 2012 at 8:30 am #762328
JanSParticipanthey, maybe we could send Limbaugh to Russia instead of Costa Rica :D
June 30, 2012 at 9:47 am #762329
kootchmanMemberThink so Dobro? Romneycare is getting scammed like crazy.. enjoy the read.
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/obamacare-individual-mandate-unlikely-work
Russia has universal care too.. in fact more doctors per capita than any of the G-8 countries… how is that going? Their mortality rate is skyrocketing. It’s universal alright. My point JaN was there is nothing about universal healthcare that assures benefits… that’s what Russia has to do with it. And it is a pretty good point to consider… in the line of Obamacare will solve all. I posted my observation.
“Higher incomes, newer equipment and more opportunities – for some Canadian physicians, the United States seems to have it all. i Some critics have long alleged that because of the “exploitative nature of medicare,” Canadian doctors cannot resist heading south. ii More recently, some argue that this brain drain is a “major contributor to physician shortages in Canada,” iii prompting physician associations and ministries of health to launch campaigns to lure expatriate, Canadian-trained physicians back home. iv Fears of physician losses are further fuelled by reports that the U.S. – renowned for luring more physicians than any other country v – could be short 85,000 doctors by 2020. “
Guess that wonderful Canada system sure works for us. McGill can train em’ and we can hire em. Jan? It’s such a great system.. why is there such a Canadian doc shorotage? Hmmmmm a doc shortage? Just as we start convening that 16 member panel to set the standards of care and the compensation tables…. wonderful. I don’t know anyone who is thinking of moving to Canada, and certainly haven’t heard any conservatives that are itching to go…( I few have voiced their wish some liberals would go.but I tell them that is bad bad bad.) . who are these people that want to leave JaN?
June 30, 2012 at 10:04 am #762330
kootchmanMemberMr. Dobro… Mr. Obama, himself, in his interview with Stephanopoulos, aired multiple times.. stated the cost of carrying unreimbursed medical costs ( uninsured ) was about $ 900 per insured. It’s still cheaper than Obamacare to carry them
We just got drubbed… we have voters to scare.. taxes! taxes! taxes! More taxes! taxes!.. here they come.. Obama taxes! (think it will work?)
You know damn well as soon as the states have to pick up their portion of expanded Medicaid… AND.. Medicare… the state will be weighing in too. How is WA going to pick up the tab without raising them. We may not be pretty, but we aren’t dumb. Once the toe is in the water… the elephant is sure to bath. Under its’ taxing provision… there is no restriction on future escalations. The Supreme Court has never put a cap on taxes or “penalties” Name one federal health program that has lowered their rates in your lifetime? One whose costs have not exploded beyond any sense of reason. Take a look at the Medicaid and Medicare cost projections when they were implemented… that’s a good start. Man they weren’t even close!
California.. being the astute man you are, well read and all that, has projected that IF they implement Obamacare in year 3 their contributing costs will be about 2.5 billion. Dobro…. they are so budget squeezed, they are talking about cutting the school year by 20 days… businesses are fleeing the state. The tax base is vaporizing. Where do you think they can possibly find 2.5 billion dollars? They sure as hell can’t borrow it.
One final point… Romney has “evolved”…
June 30, 2012 at 10:49 am #762331
kootchmanMemberLet’s assume… your employer…. a large employer, is now providing health benefits. You can safely assume a family of four is topping 9 grand per year in employer contributions. He looks at the costs… the penalty and the outlay. which does he do? Take the hit… and you are thrown into the deep end of the pool… it makes no economic sense to carry you. Right from the wording of ACA
“As previously mentioned, beginning in 2014, a large employer will be subject to a penalty if any of its full-time employees receives a premium credit toward their exchange plan. In 2014, the monthly penalty assessed to employers who do not offer coverage will be equal to the number of full-time employees minus 30 multiplied by one-twelfth of $2,000 for any applicable month. After 2014, the penalty payment amount would be indexed by the premium adjustment percentage for the calendar year.
You better be one highly prized, irreplaceable employee with a very valuable skill set!! Worse… is the incentive to not grow your business at all… keep it below 50 employees and contract out as much as you can to 1099 your expenses.
For you math wizards… that is less than 2K per employee and then the employee has to purchase from the pool! The employer saves 7 grand by dumping your coverage. Per employee. JaN that is far more astounding than being micro-chipped…and you can read it… it’s not rumor.
Remember this one “if you like your coverage, you can keep it”
I guess “can” was the operative word. He didn’t say he would incentivize your employer dumping your ass to the curb.
June 30, 2012 at 2:50 pm #762332
redblackParticipanti guess kootch’s answer to jan’s original question would be, “nothing.”
if you like your coverage, you can keep it.
you can do better than this, kootch. show me an example of an employer – any employer – who already offers health insurance who plans on dumping his employee’s health care benefits package after 2014.
one. just one.
what don’t you understand about this? since employer-provided insurance is the de facto “system” in the united states, the legislation is aimed at employers who don’t already offer health insurance at group rates.
and for the self-employed or self-insured, it directs the states to form exchanges so consumers can shop for plans that fit their needs and budgets.
the ACA is basically filling the potholes, and attempting to cap insurance costs.
but if you feel it’s worth your ire and rage, by all means, have at it.
June 30, 2012 at 3:43 pm #762333
dobroParticipantHere’s a list with some of the major points to understand…
1. Insurance will be cheaper because everyone will be required to have it.
2. You can keep your current insurance if you like it.
3. No taxpayer dollars. You pay your share of the policy premiums just like now. But it will be lower.
4. In fact, if anyone who can afford insurance freeloads, they have to pay a penalty (to be collected by the IRS, hence the confusion about it being a tax).
5. If you can’t afford insurance, you will get help, so you can.
6. Your adult kids can stay on the policy until 26, so they will be insured while in college or pursuing a career.
7. Not government-run healthcare! It’s free market! The government just requires you to have it. Your relationship with your doctor stays the same.
8. Don’t like the insurance through your employment or want to change jobs but are afraid to lose your insurance? There will be affordable plans for you to choose from (created by demand). You can change jobs if you want.
9.Near retirement but too young for Medicare? The Feds give money to your employer to supplement your health care insurance in retirement, if they offer such a benefit to you already.
10. Got a preexisting condition? Insurance companies think we all do. It doesn’t matter. They have to insure you.
11. If insurance companies charge too much in so-called administrative fees and other things not related to healh care, they have to refund it to you. (First rebate checks coming this August).
June 30, 2012 at 4:02 pm #762334
dobroParticipantFrom the CBO report on who will pay the penalty…
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have estimated that about 21 million nonelderly residents will be uninsured in 2016, but the majority of them will not be subject to the penalty. Unauthorized immigrants, for example, are exempted from the mandate to obtain health insurance. Others will be subject to the mandate but exempted from the penalty—for example, because they will have income low enough that they
are not required to file an income tax return, because they are members of Indian tribes, or because the premium they would have to pay would exceed a specified share of their income (initially 8 percent in 2014 and indexed over time). Individuals may also be granted waivers from the penalty because of hardship and may be exempted from the mandate on the basis of their religious beliefs.
June 30, 2012 at 4:06 pm #762335
dobroParticipantHere’s another FAQ about health care reform from Kaiser (a major health insurance company)
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2010/march/22/consumers-guide-health-reform.aspx
June 30, 2012 at 4:14 pm #762336
BostonmanMemberHey Redblack, I was just asked yesterday to do a cost analysis of eliminating insurance for our company of 54 and instead paying people an extra 2 or 3k a year. I was also asked to come up with a plan to be able to get rid of 5 people to bring us under the 50 person minimum.
Anyone who things this is going to lower premiums is in dreamland. Its a tax plain and simple. Roberts pointed out that congress has taxing ability and that was his justification for leaving it in place ergo its a tax.
I guess Obama can’t say that he didn’t raise taxes on the middle class now.
June 30, 2012 at 4:30 pm #762337
waynsterParticipantlets see none of this takes affect till 2014 and that’s 2 yrs down the road seems to me there is another agenda for dumping insurance plans and laying off employees …….The only thing I see is a wide spread panic attack cursing the vain’s of tea party(baggers) and the GOP.. why they didn’t get what they wanted out of their bush appointed conservative justice’s not once now twice in the same week…. cry me another river…..
I did like this skit from colbert on the anouncement of aca from cnn and fox….http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/416046/june-28-2012/cable-news-gaffe-on-obamacare-supreme-court-ruling
June 30, 2012 at 4:59 pm #762338
dobroParticipantSmall businesses that have fewer than 10 employees, average wages beneath $25,000, and that provide insurance for their workers will get a 50% tax credit on their contribution. The tax credit reaches up to small businesses with up to 50 employees and average wages of $50,000, though it gets smaller as the business get bigger and richer. (Note: 96% of small businesses have fewer than 50 employees.)
June 30, 2012 at 5:28 pm #762339
DBPMemberThank you, dobro! If we had enough beans to hire an official research guy, I’d recommend you for the job.
June 30, 2012 at 7:03 pm #762340
kootchmanMemberOne of the major scoring assumptions was 100 per cent participation by all the states. That was going to get the federal government off the exploding deficit hooks, without the power to enforce by penalizing the states and withholding Medicaid funds it’s not going to happen. Too many states with too much debt. Insurance will not be cheaper. Dobro..those are tidbits for points and I don’t think the politics will play out that way. It’s a “T” as in tax. It was Obamacare… now it the Obamacare Tax Increase. Curious, how is Obama going to handle the healthcare needs of those 18-30 year old illegals now? A 50% tax cut for small business? Here we go, government shuffleboard… take the diminished revenue off the books too… and the deficit gets bigger still. I dunno Dobro.. all I hear from my niece in Lowell (social worker) is costs are exploding, demand is rising and providers are opting out at increasingly higher rates. Your assertion that Mass “lowered” costs is not shared by non politcos. More to the point, over 90 per cent of Mass residents were covered before Romneycare…. highest in the nation. Curious Dobro… who do you think if going to pick up the tab for all those waivers for low income recepients? The middle class. It’s going to be a doozy. I would trust Bostonman on this one.. the pencils are out in every business in America.. and I assure you, if it is cheaper… and it will be… businesses are going to dump this right in the lap of you and every other taxpayer. As I heard this week.. it’s smarter to give a nominal raise, kick out the healthcare plan because wages never rise as fast as healthcare. See how that works? A little pay increase and the employer just shrugs when the employee has to fend off 5% or more annual increases…”what can I do… it’s a the government”?!!
excerpts
The Massachusetts Medical Society recently reported that the state law has resulted in “longer patient wait times [and] continued difficult access to primary care physicians.” The average wait time in Massachusetts to see an internal medicine physician is now 48 days — double the national average.
Meanwhile health costs continue to skyrocket out of control, both for the state government and for privately insured patients. Sally Pipes notes that over the next 10 years, the plan will cost the state government $2 billion more than predicted. Similarly, prior to the new law insurance prices in Massachusetts increased at a rate 3.7% slower than the national average; after the “reform,” they’re increasing 5.8% faster.
To cut costs, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has proposed replacing the standard payment system with draconian “global budgets” where doctors and hospitals would be given a fixed amount to care for the patients assigned to them. The providers would then keep a portion of the savings if they came under budget (or suffer penalties if they ran over budget) — thus creating morally perverse incentives to deny care to their patients
The access problems have gotten so bad that the state legislature even considered forcing doctors to accept government-controlled insurance rates as a condition of retaining their state medical licenses (regardless of whether or not the doctors lost money on each patient)
Given this hostile practice climate, it is no wonder that many Massachusetts physicians are considering opting out of the government-run system into “concierge practices” — or leaving the state altogether. Dr. Lorraine Schratz, a Massachusetts pediatric cardiologist, noted that half of physicians trained in the state are leaving due to the poor practice environment and poor reimbursements.
One of the ways ObamaCare will attempt to expand “coverage” will be via dramatically expanding the Medicaid program. But as Medicaid patient Nicole Dardeau recently told the New York Times, “My Medicaid card is useless for me right now…. It’s a useless piece of plastic. I can’t find an orthopedic surgeon or a pain management doctor who will accept Medicaid.”
http://pjmedia.com/blog/massachusetts-the-canary-in-the-coal-mine-for-obamacare/
.
June 30, 2012 at 7:33 pm #762341
JanSParticipantproviders are opting out…opting out of what? taking insurance? as a provider, I can tell you that *I* am not opting out of anything, since a lot in the ACA has not been implemented yet. A “what if” scenario – what if Obama is reelected, what if the GOP is stymied from repealing this law (first they argued that it was unconstitutional, not, since the SCOTUS says it is, they are jumping on the bandwagon of “new tax” “new tax”)then what are oyu going to be yelling about? Like it or not, it’s the law of the land, and if the states don’t implement, the fed. gov’t. will…do you really think those constituents in those states will just roll over and say “whatever”? No, when they see what others are getting, they will want to. It could be a scenario for a backlash. And please remember..we’re talking about 2014 here, when the larger portion is implemented. We’re not talking about Monday morning.
Yep, the sky is falling.
June 30, 2012 at 7:39 pm #762342
JanSParticipantpgmedia…right wing propaganda..just as slanted as any “leftie” rag.
I have family in Mass. and they seem to be very happy with their healthcare.
Maybe that Medicaid recipient should move to Seattle…there’s access here :D
June 30, 2012 at 7:46 pm #762343
kootchmanMemberJan,, you are a massage therapist… not a primary care provider. Read the article .. I didn’t make it up… Doctors are not taking Mass healthcare patients… the have gone concierge or cash. Sure the federal government will implement it…. now let’s see em how well they do. It’s the law of the land.. and the Supreme Court didn’t endorse it as a great plan…they threw it back into the political arena for another go round. But we know all about the law of the land don’t we. November will decide… If you control the three branches of government.. it will go forward. If you lose the Senate or the White House… it won’t Remember we just got a lesson from Obama… selective enforcement of congressional laws…lose the Senate and let’s see where the money comes from…. eh? we will see the mood of the country .. if they like it… the ACA will live…if they don;t the Obamacare Tax Increase will fail.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.