Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Health Care Bill

T

Tathariel

Supporter
Supporter
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
I dont feel like paying for 32 Million people.

Call me ignorant, tell me I dont know anything about the economy, call me an asshole.

Heath care to many is an incentive to work. Without the need to pay for it yourself, you won't want to work. Certain people now will think, "Hey, I can now get basic health care without working." So, they stop working. And people who have to pay for these people work harder, and their money is spent on an inconsiderate jerk who doesn't want to work. Of course, people with medical conditions that affect their work should get health care, but not from the tax-payers.


The basic idea of providing healthcare for everyone is a great idea. Wonderful even. How our goverment is going out about it is diffrent.

You still have the choice of choosing between private and national health insurance. So the country is still not united under this bill.

What happens if private insurance starts offering better rates than national insurance?

Did you know that when the time comes and you dont go pick from the government healthcare plans and choose private insurance, you'll be fined about 2.5% of your wages???

Did you know that individuals will STILL be able to be denied based on pre-existing conditions until about 2014 when everyone is SUPPOUST to be covered.
We'll be lucky if that doesn't manage to change by then.

Whatever, point for this is. I need some more perspective and opinions from intelligent people. I'm rather not for this bill right now and I need to know more about why I should be.

and hey, check this out. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lecAy-3Qtxk&feature=related[/youtube]
 
I agree. I'm from Canada and we have free health care here, but it kinda sucks for so many reasons.

First, the money gets lost the same way it always does in governments. Second, those that actually get the nice and fast treatments are those who have money and pay for private care. The fact that some can afford going elsewhere frees a few spots for others, but not enough to make a difference. The amount of cash paid by everyone for the public health care - of everyone - is so impossibly big that I'm thinking if I had to pay for everything that I had to take care of, I'd still be way richer in the end. I could have just saved an amount in case I got seriously hurt, and there could be special loans for health care incidents, which there probably are anyway... but I'm not aware of it.

Medications do not even count in the health care system, so we still have to pay for that individually. There is a public insurance which can be valuable when you have to pay over 300$ of medications every month, but otherwise, I've seen my bf pay for 100$ of medications in one month for an elbow bursitis and I think he saved maybe 20 bucks at most at the end of the month. As for the insurance I had with my old job, it wasn't that incredible either.

I'm sure there are positive sides on this, but right now I simply don't see it. The places where I've seen it work and be useful is in smaller cities, where the hospitals cannot possibly be so full and where not having to pay for the treatments is pretty fortunate. I must agree that it's nice to be able to just walk to a clinic or hospital and be treated as soon as possible without having to pay for anything. Patients are treated according to the gravity of their situation and it feels more human to see a gravely injured person walk in and be treated immediately instead of asking them to wait patiently for their turn to come.

Then again, there are pros and cons to any of the possibilities. I've heard a few indecent things about the way the health system works in the US, but I'm not sure exactly what I was told. Something about people being charged for expensive medications when they didn't really needed it, I'm not sure. I wasn't told the details either, but we're certainly spared of some problems which simply don't take place in such a system. You'd have to play the devil's advocate to decide which you truly prefer.
 
You think YOU are paying for this? Businesses are. Businesses who make something over half a million in profits each year have to offer health insurance to their employees. If they don't offer it, they have to pay into the government health care fund. Besides, we've kind of had health care before; Medicare - this just ensures that people who aren't covered by Medicare because they make just barely too much can have health care.

It also encourages insurance companies to offer better and cheaper insurance to compete with the government's. It made it illegal to be turned down due to pre-existing conditions, and they can't cut you off when you get injured.
 
I need some more perspective and opinions from intelligent people.
Click to expand...

You fail to qualify.

EVERYONE IS GETTING TAXED.....I dont care if big businesses are getting health insurance, and as far as I know, any worthwhile business that grosses at least half a mil would offer health care. I'm sure there are a few that dont.

For people without insurance.
I was 16 working at JACK IN THE FREAKING BOX and I had health insurance.

Heres a breakdown of The Patient Protection and Affordability Act

Section 1002 of the Amendment – Individual responsibility: Starting in 2014 everyone will be required to maintain health insurance. If you go without insurance, you will be subject to a tax of $695 per year.

Section 1003 of the Amendment – Emploer responsibility: Large companies will be required to provide health insurance as a benefit to its employees. Companies that do not provide this benefit will be imposed a tax of $2,000 a year per employee.

Section 1401 of the Amendment – High cost plan excise tax: Starting in 2018, high cost health insurance plans will be subject to a tax. Plans for single persons that cost in excess of $10,200 and family plans that cost in excess of $27,500 are in this sections crosshairs. The excise tax rate on incremental costs will be 40 percent. In an attempt to appease union dissent, this tax will not be assessed on the individual but will be assessed on the insurance company providing the plan. Ultimately, the costs will still be burdened by the purchaser.

Section 1402 of the Amendment – Medicare tax: Medicare tax will now be assessed on investment income for families making in excess of $250,000 and for singles making over $200,000. Investment income includes interest, dividends, capital gains, rental income and royalties. In the past, Medicare taxes had been assessed on wages only. Earn one dollar of investment income while you are over the threshold limits and you will incur this tax. This tax will commence January 1, 2013.

Section 9015 of the Original Bill – Medicare tax: In addition to the expansion of Medicare tax on investment income as noted in Section 1402 above, the Medicare tax rate has also increased. This tax increases by a third, from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent.

Section 1404 of the Amendment – Brand name pharmaceuticals: Starting in 2011, the pharmaceutical industry will be subject to a $2.5 billion annual excise tax. The annual excise tax increases in subsequent years, rising to $4.2 billion in 2018. The tax is assessed based on a companies market share and is non-deductible for federal tax purposes.

Section 1405 of the Amendment – Excise tax on medical device manufacturers: Sales of medical devices will be subject to a 2.9 percent national sales tax. This will apply to sales occurring after December 31, 2012.

Section 1406 of the Amendment – Health insurance providers: Starting in 2014, the health insurance industry will be subject to an $8.0 billion annual excise tax. The excise tax increases to $11.3 billion annually for 2015, 2016, and 2017. The excise tax increases to $14.3 billion in 2018 and rises by inflation thereafter. The tax is assessed based on a companies market share and is non-deductible for federal tax purposes. Does anyone think this will create inflation in the health insurance premiums?

Section 9013 of the Original Bill - Modification of itemized deduction for medical expenses: For those incurring significant medical costs, your ability to deduct these expenses will be decreased. This legislation increases the adjusted gross income threshold for claiming an itemized deduction from 7.5 percent to 10 percent.

Section 10907 of the Original Bill - Excise tax on indoor tanning services: This is a sales tax of ten percent assessed on your trip to the tanning salon. This tax begins July 1, 2010.
 
Tathariel said:
For people without insurance.
I was 16 working at JACK IN THE FREAKING BOX and I had health insurance.
Click to expand...
Times have changed, old man.

Section 1402 of the Amendment – Medicare tax: Medicare tax will now be assessed on investment income for families making in excess of $250,000 and for singles making over $200,000. Investment income includes interest, dividends, capital gains, rental income and royalties. In the past, Medicare taxes had been assessed on wages only. Earn one dollar of investment income while you are over the threshold limits and you will incur this tax. This tax will commence January 1, 2013.
Click to expand...
So, you don't want to tax the rich? They're making $200,000 off investments alone, much less what exorbitant amount they're getting as an attorney/politician/trust fund baby. Yeah, color me unsympathetic.

Section 1406 of the Amendment – Health insurance providers: Starting in 2014, the health insurance industry will be subject to an $8.0 billion annual excise tax. The excise tax increases to $11.3 billion annually for 2015, 2016, and 2017. The excise tax increases to $14.3 billion in 2018 and rises by inflation thereafter. The tax is assessed based on a companies market share and is non-deductible for federal tax purposes. Does anyone think this will create inflation in the health insurance premiums?
Click to expand...
You mean, more than the inflation of health insurance premiums I've had to pay the past years just so the companies can improve their profitability? We've had horrible, unconscionable increases in premiums with a corresponding REDUCTION in benefits for the price every year I've been working, and I work for a HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY. Your concern about the consequences is not ill-founded. However, history shows it would happen ANYWAY, even if they continued to enjoy their preferred, exempt status. Now they're not able to price-fix legally, so I count that a win.

Section 10907 of the Original Bill - Excise tax on indoor tanning services: This is a sales tax of ten percent assessed on your trip to the tanning salon. This tax begins July 1, 2010.
Click to expand...
... really?
 
Excuse me, but don't insurance holders pay for non-insurance holders whenever a non-insured person goes into an emergency room? I'm pretty sure, in California at least, people cannot be turned away at an emergency room. Which means I pay more as they are there at their sickest, instead of seeking preventative care (which is a hell of a lot cheaper).

Isn't it cheaper for all of us to address this problem?
 
Section 10907 of the Original Bill - Excise tax on indoor tanning services: This is a sales tax of ten percent assessed on your trip to the tanning salon. This tax begins July 1, 2010.

... really?

Yeah, lol. Its part of the Bill, and I like your arguments.
 
I for one am happy to see an improvement in the united states health care system, even if its not as good as I would like it to be.

It's a step; but a step in the right direction.
 
I'm just worried... a whole new system for me to work through and figure out... and sadly I can't just avoid getting sick...

I'll pray for the best, but brace for the worst.
 
I would love to have an opt out option at the cost of having to pay for all of my medical bills from my income versus paying into a system I don't plan on using unless I'm dying. And that would be the whole point. I would much rather pay off my medical debt than make taxpayers cover my ass. Talk about feeling guilty as hell for getting sick.

The biggest fear I have is what a lot of Brits complain about. They quality of the care is miserable because the doctors aren't being paid like they used to, so they don't perform as they don't get any bonuses for doing a much better job. There's nothing in this bill stating that won't happen. So I would much rather have all doctors on their own payroll without Uncle Scam involved.

So why not move to Canada now that our medical systems will mirror each other? At least I can smoke weed at the cost of not having some amount of firearms.
 
I'm just trying to decide if I want East Coast Canada or West Cost.

Once that's decided, we plan on packing. No point in staying in the South. I hate mosquitoes.
 
Tathariel said:
Heath care to many is an incentive to work. Without the need to pay for it yourself, you won't want to work. Certain people now will think, "Hey, I can now get basic health care without working." So, they stop working. And people who have to pay for these people work harder, and their money is spent on an inconsiderate jerk who doesn't want to work. Of course, people with medical conditions that affect their work should get health care, but not from the tax-payers.
Click to expand...

Heh, okay.
Yes, the overwhelming majority in America only work because they want health insurance. Yes, you hit the nail on the head right there. I envy your ability to post the undeniable truth of the matter. Because, you know, no one works to support themselves or a family. Right?

Seriously, that's how your comment on that came off. The number of people that work only to get healthcare is incredibly low; I'd estimate less than 10% of the population. I, myself, find it grossly offensive that you would claim this. I have more things to worry about than healthcare. Yeah, I have been to the doctor only twice in the past five years. The first only because I had health insurance at the company I worked for, the second only recently because I was approved for a reduced support cost plan from a hospital near me. I've been to the dentist exactly twice in that time as well; again because of that company's health plan. The optometrist? Only once, and that's cause of the same thing. In fact I need to go shell out $100 so that I can get my contact prescription renewed, then $100 for my contacts.

So, yes, I only work because I can get healthcare, right? Oh, wait... I haven't had healthcare in almost four years. The place I worked after the aforementioned company offered healthcare, but because they were a small company (think 30ish people) the healthcare providers didn't give them as much of a discount as a large corporation. To put it in perspective:
Corporation I worked for - Top Medical Plan + Dental + Vision = $180 PER MONTH (which is friggin fantastic)
Small company after that - Medical Plan = $250 PER MONTH (and that was only for medical)

Yeah, when I was only making the same as I was before moving jobs getting healthcare at that rate was not in my budget anymore. I've since left that company but since then I've had to deal with two layoffs and my now second bout of unemployment. Doesn't make it very easy to get healthcare on my own, now, does it?

Which brings me to another point, and something MM mentioned. Medical rates are certainly going up while the benefits go down. It's happening all around. Yes, I like company-assisted healthcare, but I've done without it for most of my life. I will continue to do without it. Sucks, though, when you have nothing and need to go to a doctor.
 
Tathariel said:
I dont feel like paying for 32 Million people.
Click to expand...

Cool, 'cuz you won't.

Call me ignorant, tell me I dont know anything about the economy, call me an asshole.
Click to expand...

You are ignorant, know next to nothing about the economy, and are a sadistic asshole.

Heath care to many is an incentive to work.
Click to expand...

Evidence the first: Thinking that this is about providing health care to people who do not work.

This is about the working poor - men and women who work, but for one reason or another, have been bumped off of the health insurance rolls.

THE LAZY FUCKS WHO DO NOT WORK ALREADY GET FREE HEALTH CARE

They have for decades.

I'm not even talking about emergency room care. I've been bedridden for a solid chunk of the past four years, unable to get government aid because I made too much money.

If I were a lazy bum, I'd get care. But no, because I want to have an income, I was denied.

Without the need to pay for it yourself, you won't want to work. Certain people now will think, "Hey, I can now get basic health care without working." So, they stop working.
Click to expand...

And get exactly what they would have before.

And people who have to pay for these people work harder,
Click to expand...

And here is where your argument goes to shit and you prove that you do not understand how the economics of health care works.

This country spends more money denying care than it would to insure every uninsured person in the country.

That has rather little to do with it though. The economics of health care in the United States mimics the development of a guard economy - paying people to do nothing but protect the current status quo, rather than paying them to actually produce more.

Rather than paying them to stay healthy (by doing things like oh, taxing tanning salons - brilliant idea, by the way), and be productive members of the workforce, you want to pay to see people suffer and die.

Therefore, you are also an asshole.

Now - while I was laying in agony for most of the past few years (for a grand total of $2,500 worth of care, mind you - go fuck yourself with a rusty rake after skipping your tetanus vaccination for a few decades, please - I lost more than that in failing two contracts) - I wasn't able to do much. There were days I was in so much pain I could neither walk nor speak.

"Go find a job!"

Hahaha.

Funny.

I could, of course, change my opinion now that I'm back on my feet again after what would best be described as two years of living hell, but that would be the Republican tack.

and their money is spent on an inconsiderate jerk who doesn't want to work. Of course, people with medical conditions that affect their work should get health care, but not from the tax-payers.
Click to expand...

Most people want to be something. The fact is we produce a helluva lot more than we need, so the idea of socialism is not quite what it was back in Mises' time.

The basic idea of providing healthcare for everyone is a great idea. Wonderful even. How our goverment is going out about it is diffrent.

You still have the choice of choosing between private and national health insurance. So the country is still not united under this bill.
Click to expand...

What national insurance?

Do you mean national health insurance exchanges? Where you know, you get to trade out your current insurance if you don't like it? Would go great with repealing the antitrust exemption.

What happens if private insurance starts offering better rates than national insurance?

Did you know that when the time comes and you dont go pick from the government healthcare plans and choose private insurance, you'll be fined about 2.5% of your wages???

Did you know that individuals will STILL be able to be denied based on pre-existing conditions until about 2014 when everyone is SUPPOUST to be covered.
We'll be lucky if that doesn't manage to change by then.
Click to expand...

1) It'd be nice if you learned to spell.
2) The reason for the mandatory coverage and nixing pre-existing conditions for non-kids at the same time is because the concepts go hand in hand. If anything, the penalty for lack of insurance is a slap on the wrist.

Whatever, point for this is. I need some more perspective and opinions from intelligent people. I'm rather not for this bill right now and I need to know more about why I should be.
Click to expand...

It's a mess. It has a lot of important cost-control pilot programs, which it is letting communities handle to determine on their own. So communities can choose to try bundled payments, or other methods, to try and balance the other part of this equation - not just health insurers ripping people off, but the insane cost of health care as well. It's a subtle factor in the current bill that may prove to be the most powerful - as communities find better care, those methods can propagate without the interference of the federal government.

The 'predicted' cost savings from that is 5.4% or something, but I would not be surprised if it ends up being closer to 54%.
 
dramamine213 said:
If you're serious, we'll stop in TN and grab your gay ass up. :D
Click to expand...

Ha. Dram lives in the state next to me xD

FYI = I have NO health care right now. My parents are actually happy that the bill got passed. Why? Because they can PUT ME BACK ON THEIR PLAN for another 4 years. They want what's best for me and they know I've got health problems right now that need seeing to that I just don't have the money to get taken care of. [I.E- My left wrist makes a 'snap,crackle,pop' noise when rotated, I'm partially deaf in one ear from...shit that happened before and it's unsure whether or not it's irreparable damage at this point]

Do you know how scary it is to be hanging out with your friends one weekend and suddenly to be unable to sit up because your back is in excruciating pain to the point of tears? My friends were worried enough they almost took me to the ER. But didn't because they knew I had no health care nor the funds to pay off such a debt. Luckily a friend of mine had a muscle relaxer and it cleared up the pain in my back after a few days.

BESIDES THE POINT. That is SCARY to know that your entire world is upside down and you have no way to pay for it. I'd rather have health insurance thanks to THE GOVERNMENT. Which by the way - after you retire you get Medicare so you get gov't health insurance. I would rather do this than have to deal with my paranoia of hospitals coupled with stress COUPLED WITH trying to find out if I can pay. K thx.
 
I tend to be apolitical. But to my view, the old and now in transition system is/was broken. As pointed out, people get free health care if they lack insurance or money at emergency rooms. My doctor treated low-income students for rabies recently and it took him hours of argument to get reimbursed a few dollars above the cost of the actual medication. Other doctors told him he was crazy to treat those kids. Just send them to emergency and the hospital automatically gets reimbursed at six times the rate a general practitioner will get. A lot of doctors won't take Medicare patients, because the reimbursement rate is low and in some places, you simply cannot find a doctor.

It's just I lack any faith that our government will actually fix the problem in a manner that isn't designed to reward special interests and actually fix the problem. I'm lucky I have insurance and a job and a nice income. And I think if a person is ill, they should be able to get treatment. To me, it just seems right.

Is Obama's solution going to work? I doubt it. But doing nothing was sucking big time too.
 
I'd rather watch something fail than see nothing done also.
Regardless, this things gonna fail with epic proportions.

Whatever.

>end topic<
 
Tathariel said:
I'd rather watch something fail than see nothing done also.
Regardless, this things gonna fail with epic proportions.

Whatever.

>end topic<
Click to expand...
Oh, declaring a topic ended never works. It just doesn't.

You can tell I work in a corporate environment, because when I read the above, my thought was "yes, but it won't really be Obama's fault, per se..." Which strikes me as a very common response in a corporate hierarchy.
 
Eh, all the doom sayers are worried because this will end up being another defeat to them, like medicare, medicaid and social security.

Because gosh darn it, we can't let dem poor people have a first world level of living. Nope, God be punishing dem for not making enough money.
 
There are some big pros and some big cons to it. I'm happy that insurance companies can no longer deny people anymore based solely on their medical history. I think that's crud that insurance companies can do that to begin with. However, the Republican in me is a little aggrivated that I have to shell out extra money for other people I'm not really responsible for.

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://bluemoonroleplaying.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=13331">viewtopic.php?f=23&t=13331</a><!-- l -->
 
But the Republican in you is fine with the DOD spending billions on half-baked ideas like training bats to carry incendiaries (even though they can only carry about 3 ounces) and surgically implanting listening devices into cats (who then get hit by cars)? Because Republican administrations never say no to the Pentagon.

I'm just saying, if we're going to be paying for things that don't benefit us directly, I'd rather it be the health of fellow citizens than military ideas that a 10-year-old would realize are stupid.

EDIT: However, I do concede that there are places with worse problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom