Health care requirement??

[msmith198025]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_mandate



Don't have health insurance? Don't want to pay for it? Too bad.

It's looking like President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress are going to require you to pick up the bill.

In Washington-speak, it's called an individual mandate — or a requirement that people who don't already have health insurance to purchase it, much like most states require drivers to have automobile insurance.

[Skyhi]

Good. Uninsured individuals cost the entire system lots of $$$. I'm sure it will be affordable for those with lesser means.

To hell with Obama & the Dems plan, however. We need a single payer plan.

[froggigger]

Good. Uninsured individuals cost the entire system lots of $$$. I'm sure it will be affordable for those with lesser means.

To hell with Obama & the Dems plan, however. We need a single payer plan.

We need government completely out of it. They're a big part of the problem.

[HDRoberts]

Good. Uninsured individuals cost the entire system lots of $$$. I'm sure it will be affordable for those with lesser means.

To hell with Obama & the Dems plan, however. We need a single payer plan.

Agreed. No one doesn't have insurance. They just have the rest of us to pay. Might as well go all the way and get them real insurance with negotiated rates for procedures and real preventive care.

[msmith198025]

Agreed. No one doesn't have insurance. They just have the rest of us to pay. Might as well go all the way and get them real insurance with negotiated rates for procedures and real preventive care.

How does that relate to the typical (not all of you guys) argument that everyone deserves health care though? Some people can not afford it, and by making them get it, wont that hurt them? At least now, they can get emergency care. If that is cut out, and they HAVE to pay (when some cant) then wont that go against that argument?
Just trying to understand

[HDRoberts]

How does that relate to the typical (not all of you guys) argument that everyone deserves health care though? Some people can not afford it, and by making them get it, wont that hurt them? At least now, they can get emergency care. If that is cut out, and they HAVE to pay (when some cant) then wont that go against that argument?
Just trying to understand

There needs to be low cost options for those meeting certain income thresholds. I have little doubt there would be provisions. But a single payer system would be better here.

Plus I have no doubt that there are a lot of uninsured that can afford insurance, they are just too cheap or would rather spend money on new cars or other toys. They will gamble they don't need it, a bet some will lose, leaving the rest of us with the bill.

[msmith198025]

There needs to be low cost options for those meeting certain income thresholds. I have little doubt there would be provisions. But a single payer system would be better here.

Plus I have no doubt that there are a lot of uninsured that can afford insurance, they are just too cheap or would rather spend money on new cars or other toys. They will gamble they don't need it, a bet some will lose, leaving the rest of us with the bill.

I dont doubt that as well, but how do we make that decision on who can and cant afford it? We cant just say we have no doubt that you can and you cant. Right? I mean every situation is different. Income is not even the best threshold IMO.

So it is not as black and white and some like to make it. Repubs and Dems alike.

Personally, I think this is a political move.

[Skyhi]

I dont doubt that as well, but how do we make that decision on who can and cant afford it? We cant just say we have no doubt that you can and you cant. Right? I mean every situation is different. Income is not even the best threshold IMO.

So it is not as black and white and some like to make it. Repubs and Dems alike.

Personally, I think this is a political move.

We won't be able to make this decision accurately. That's why we need a UNIVERSAL single-payer plan.

[Derwin0]

That's why we need a UNIVERSAL single-payer plan.
Oh God no, I've dealt with the Canadian system a few times (wife is from Canada), and the wait times are atrocious.

[Derwin0]

In Washington-speak, it's called an individual mandate — or a requirement that people who don't already have health insurance to purchase it, much like most states require drivers to have automobile insurance.
Be curious to see a courts view on forcing people to buy coverage. I don't see that the Feds have that kind of authority. States might, but not the Feds.
Car Insurance, Speed Limits, DUI, Murder, and other laws are State Laws, the courts have long ruled the Feds don't have that authority.

Other than blackmailing the States to pass Insurance Laws (like they did with No Child Left Behind), the Feds don't have the authority needed to force people to buy health insurance.

[Bob Haller]

We need government completely out of it. They're a big part of the problem.

sure the current system works so well doesnt it?

[Bob Haller]

anyone without coverage would be automatically covered by a lifeline catarosphic coverage.

those with private insurance can continue as is.

[msmith198025]

anyone without coverage would be automatically covered by a lifeline catarosphic coverage.

those with private insurance can continue as is.

Is that not basically what we have not?

[fallout2600]

We need to address the root of the problem, not put another band aid on a broken system. Why has it become that you need insurance for every single doctor visit? Shouldn't a check up be reasonably priced and insurance not required?

[Bob Haller]

We need to address the root of the problem, not put another band aid on a broken system. Why has it become that you need insurance for every single doctor visit? Shouldn't a check up be reasonably priced and insurance not required?

yep lifeline insurance should just be for major problems like a appendix removal, not for hangnails:)

[fallout2600]

yep lifeline insurance should just be for major problems like a appendix removal, not for hangnails:)

:thumbup:

Yep, this has become ridiculous to say the least, doctors now use it to maximize profits. If you have insurance, they bill out more. Now, I'm all for capitalism, but has anyone ever told the doctor you don't have insurance and then filled the claim later with your insurance company? If so, did you notice the difference in the amount of the bill?

[froggigger]

Public Option To Cut Health Costs? Medicare's Record Says Dream On

"First, the rising cost of health care must be brought down." That's what President Obama recently declared when outlining the basic principles of his health care plan.

The centerpiece of President Obama's plan is a "public option," described by Tom Daschle as "a government-run insurance program, modeled after Medicare." The president asserts that this new Medicare-like program would cut costs.

But there are nearly 40 years of experience to consult, and they offer a resounding rebuttal. Across the years, Medicare's costs have risen far more than the costs of privately purchased care.

The New York Times and others have quoted studies claiming that private insurance has failed to contain costs as well as Medicare. Such studies are deeply misleading, for they omit any consideration of out-of-pocket spending, thereby neglecting a major shift in the private health care market.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=480067

I'm sure this time it will be different. :augentreher:

[msmith198025]

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=7907112&page=1


President Barack Obama said he "absolutely" expects to achieve health care reform by the end of this year because he believes the American people share his urgency.

Not all of us, not this way anyway

[Derwin0]

We need to address the root of the problem, not put another band aid on a broken system. Why has it become that you need insurance for every single doctor visit? Shouldn't a check up be reasonably priced and insurance not required?
Routine visits are not that expensive. I have a deductible plan, and the office visits I have early in the year before hitting the deductible arn't that expensive.

[Derwin0]

"First, the rising cost of health care must be brought down." That's what President Obama recently declared when outlining the basic principles of his health care plan.
Unfortuntely the way to stop the rising costs is to limit the number of tests performed, and limit visits to specialists.
If people thought HMO controls were really strick in their early days, wait until gov't takes over.
(Don't forget, Ted Kennedy's bill created HMO's in the first place, wait til we're all in the government's HMO).

[fallout2600]

Routine visits are not that expensive. I have a deductible plan, and the office visits I have early in the year before hitting the deductible arn't that expensive.

Do you look at the statement of benefits you get from your insurance provider after the visit? Look at how much the doctor billed out. I've notice it as high as $150.00 for a standard visit. If you haven't hit your deductible, then you owe $150.00 minus the discount for having insurance and being in network. Now, please explain to me how $150.00 for a standard checkup is a realistic price? This mechanism right here allows doctors to freely drive up price. Imagine insurance disappeared, people would not be happy with the pricing structures most doctors are currently using and having to pay 100% out of pocket, lots of folks wouldn't be able to afford it. Insurance is the vehicle to drive up price. The doctors, politicians, and insurance companies are laughing the whole way to the bank...

[Salsadancer7]

Oh God no, I've dealt with the Canadian system a few times (wife is from Canada), and the wait times are atrocious.

But you are trying to compare how things are run in the US and how things are run in Canada. IF both countries ran things the same, I could see your side....but Canada isn't the US and the US is NOT Canada.

[cybok0]

But you are trying to compare how things are run in the US and how things are run in Canada. IF both countries ran things the same, I could see your side....but Canada isn't the US and the US is NOT Canada.

Welcome Salsa.:welcome::others-276::cheerleader-108:

[Salsadancer7]

Welcome Salsa.:welcome::others-276::cheerleader-108:

The funniest part is....I could I have sworn I had posted here before!! LMAO!

Thanks Bud! FINALLY, a place I can visit during working hours where a f***ing firewall is not pissing me off! :)

[msmith198025]

The funniest part is....I could I have sworn I had posted here before!! LMAO!

Thanks Bud! FINALLY, a place I can visit during working hours where a f***ing firewall is not pissing me off! :)

I would have sworn you had too, I was suprised to see your post count. Want me to reset it? All of your posts can be your first!!!! lol

[cybok0]

I would have sworn you had too, I was suprised to see your post count. Want me to reset it? All of your posts can be your first!!!! lol

I'm gonna do that with yours.

[msmith198025]

I'm gonna do that with yours.

Haha, you are just mad that I passed you!:05:

[Salsadancer7]

I would have sworn you had too, I was suprised to see your post count. Want me to reset it? All of your posts can be your first!!!! lol

I have never been about "being 1st to....." That can be a two-edged sword....:05:

[cybok0]

Haha, you are just mad that I passed you!:05:

Damn right.:free-happy-smileys-

[msmith198025]

I have never been about "being 1st to....." That can be a two-edged sword....:05:

Haha, it is gonna take me a while to get used to someone registering in MARCH as being a NEW MEMBER

[cybok0]

I have never been about "being 1st to....." That can be a two-edged sword....:05:

There is always a first for everything.

[msmith198025]

There is always a first for everything.

True, that is the first time you have said that here today....

[cybok0]

True, that is the first time you have said that here today....

Smartass.:augentreher::026::)

[msmith198025]

Smartass.:augentreher::026::)

What is it with me today......

Anyway, better to be a smartass than a dumb........:05:

[cybok0]

What is it with me today......

Anyway, better to be a smartass than a dumb........:05:

Isn't thre a thread here about people from the south being...wait...nevermind.:Shh::Shh::Shh::026:

[msmith198025]

Isn't thre a thread here about people from the south being...wait...nevermind.:Shh::Shh::Shh::026:

Huh, what yall done talkin bout?

[cybok0]

Huh, what yall done talkin bout?

LOL.:free-happy-smileys-

[msmith198025]

LOL.:free-happy-smileys-

I think I may start doing all of my posts with that good southern dialect. See how far that gets me

[cybok0]

I think I may start doing all of my posts with that good southern dialect. See how far that gets me

They'll think you're Steven.:free-happy-smileys-

JK Steve.:free-happy-smileys-

[msmith198025]

they'll think you're steven.:free-happy-smileys-

jk steve.:free-happy-smileys-

:05::05::05::05:

[froggigger]

I think I may start doing all of my posts with that good southern dialect. See how far that gets me

It'll get you a long ways with me. I'm very fluent in hick. :)

[msmith198025]

It'll get you a long ways with me. I'm very fluent in hick. :)

You aint be as fluent as us are..:)

[fallout2600]

For anyone interested in the effect Obama's health care plan can have on your take home pay (if the company you work for provides coverage). I just received an email from the president of our company stating that employees can expect between a 2k-3k increase in the cost. Bottom line with worse case scenario (3k), I would pay $111.11 more dollars a pay check for my health insurance. This would take place if Obama doesn't take the new tax on employer-provider health care benefits off the table. Just imagine the increase some folks will face if they work for small business outfits where the employer can afford to pay as big of a chunk as the big corporates can...

[msmith198025]

For anyone interested in the effect Obama's health care plan can have on your take home pay (if the company you work for provides coverage). I just received an email from the president of our company stating that employees can expect between a 2k-3k increase in the cost. Bottom line with worse case scenario (3k), I would pay $111.11 more dollars a pay check for my health insurance. This would take place if Obama doesn't take the new tax on employer-provider health care benefits off the table. Just imagine the increase some folks will face if they work for small business outfits where the employer can afford to pay as big of a chunk as the big corporates can...

Yeah, I have brought that up before as well, although not in that detail. Amazing

[Derwin0]

For anyone interested in the effect Obama's health care plan can have on your take home pay (if the company you work for provides coverage). I just received an email from the president of our company stating that employees can expect between a 2k-3k increase in the cost. Bottom line with worse case scenario (3k), I would pay $111.11 more dollars a pay check for my health insurance. This would take place if Obama doesn't take the new tax on employer-provider health care benefits off the table. Just imagine the increase some folks will face if they work for small business outfits where the employer can afford to pay as big of a chunk as the big corporates can...Worst part is, not only will the portion you pay be taxable, but so will the portion your company pays.

Ironically, Obama attacked McCain in the debates for proposing the same thing.

For instance, I pay $2092.74/year for my Medical Coverage. The company in turn pays the other 80% of $8370.96/year. With Health Care being taxable, that would increase my taxable income by $10463.75/year.
At a 25% tax bracket, that would be an extra $2616/year in taxes I would have to pay.

[msmith198025]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090625/D991LLPG0.html


With lawmakers trying to crunch the numbers on a $1 trillion health care overhaul, President Barack Obama is leaving the door open to a new tax on employer-provided health care benefits.

Senior senators said Wednesday the benefits tax could be essential for the complex plan to be fully financed.

[fallout2600]

Worst part is, not only will the portion you pay be taxable, but so will the portion your company pays.

Ironically, Obama attacked McCain in the debates for proposing the same thing.

For instance, I pay $2092.74/year for my Medical Coverage. The company in turn pays the other 80% of $8370.96/year. With Health Care being taxable, that would increase my taxable income by $10463.75/year.
At a 25% tax bracket, that would be an extra $2616/year in taxes I would have to pay.

I didn't think of that....yep.....People need to wake up and realize this is going to affect everyone.

[Skyhi]

Worst part is, not only will the portion you pay be taxable, but so will the portion your company pays.

Ironically, Obama attacked McCain in the debates for proposing the same thing.

For instance, I pay $2092.74/year for my Medical Coverage. The company in turn pays the other 80% of $8370.96/year. With Health Care being taxable, that would increase my taxable income by $10463.75/year.
At a 25% tax bracket, that would be an extra $2616/year in taxes I would have to pay.

I hated it when McCain proposed it and I still hate it today.

[HDRoberts]

I hated it when McCain proposed it and I still hate it today.

I agree.

[Bear Paws]

I hated it when McCain proposed it and I still hate it today.


I agree. So why should your portion be tax deductible or exempt and the employer's payment for you not counted as income. It is income.. Discretionary no less. Its about time people started to carry their own weight around here. As it is over 50% don't pull their share in taxes to keep this country running. The free ride needs to end. We can't support the dead beats any longer.. .

[Bob Haller]

far better to fund lifeline health insurance from taxes on tobacco, booze, and other health destructive things.

like soda, high calorie foods etc.

[Derwin0]

So why should your portion be tax deductible or exempt and the employer's payment for you not counted as income. It is income.. Discretionary no less. Its about time people started to carry their own weight around here. As it is over 50% don't pull their share in taxes to keep this country running. The free ride needs to end. We can't support the dead beats any longer.. .
Because certain things in life should not be taxed. Food should not be subject to sales tax, and health insurance should exempt for income tax.

Actually, exempting health insurance from income tax is a big incentive for people to get it. Remove the exemptions, and many more people will drop their insurance, thus increasing the burden on the system.
That's why I've always believed that private health insurance should have the same tax exemption as company provided insurance, to increase the numbers of people that buy insurance thus reducing the uninsured burden on the system.

The tax break is an incentive to have people do what we want them too. The mortgage interest is the same thing, but encouraging people to buy homes. Though I wouldn't be surprised if that's the next thing the Democrats go after, especially since a large portion of their base rents instead of owns.

[HDRoberts]

Because certain things in life should not be taxed. Food should not be subject to sales tax, and health insurance should exempt for income tax.

Actually, exempting health insurance from income tax is a big incentive for people to get it. Remove the exemptions, and many more people will drop their insurance, thus increasing the burden on the system.
That's why I've always believed that private health insurance should have the same tax exemption as company provided insurance, to increase the numbers of people that buy insurance thus reducing the uninsured burden on the system.

The tax break is an incentive to have people do what we want them too. The mortgage interest is the same thing, but encouraging people to buy homes. Though I wouldn't be surprised if that's the next thing the Democrats go after, especially since a large portion of their base rents instead of owns.

Agreed. Health insurance should always be pre-tax to encourage people to get it. And in my company, it is not discretionary income. We all have the same insurance, and have to have it.

[fallout2600]

Agreed. Health insurance should always be pre-tax to encourage people to get it. And in my company, it is not discretionary income. We all have the same insurance, and have to have it.

Agreed, should always be pre-tax b/c its a benefit. I'm sick of the right trying to make me feel different about it with the stupid argument of "its actually part of your total compensation". No, its not. It is a benefit that I can chose to enroll in. If I didn't enroll in it, I would be taxed at a higher salary. Corporate love to justify the benefits as "part of your salary". Its just an old management hack to sideline folks from demanding a raise.

[Bear Paws]

[QUOTE]Because certain things in life should not be taxed. Food should not be subject to sales tax, and health insurance should exempt for income tax. Like energy?? I don't hear much from the liberals on the necessity of energy being exempt from taxes.

[HD MM]

Like energy?? I don't hear much from the liberals on the necessity of energy being exempt from taxes.

Technically speaking you don't need "energy" for survival. You do need food and your health though.

Give me two sticks and I'll start my own heat source.

[Bear Paws]

Technically speaking you don't need "energy" for survival. You do need food and your health though.

Give me two sticks and I'll start my own heat source. Really? Technically that's not reality..is it? Pretty difficult to get food and keep your health in NYC without energy. Unless you think eating and burning the insurance papers will keep you healthy. Under the new energy tax even burning that will be taxed.

[fallout2600]

Technically speaking you don't need "energy" for survival. You do need food and your health though.

Give me two sticks and I'll start my own heat source.

Give me a break! In order to maintain the current quality of life we experience, then energy is a necessity. If we can't maintain the current quality of life, then society will end in chaos. Don't believe me? Next time a hurricane hits and floods a large city, go ahead and set up camp there and let me know how it goes. Make sure to bring your guns, b/c you will need to find your own food and good luck surviving with A/C in 110 degree heat....Energy is a requirement for civil society in the modern age.

[HDRoberts]

Give me a break! In order to maintain the current quality of life we experience, then energy is a necessity. If we can't maintain the current quality of life, then society will end in chaos. Don't believe me? Next time a hurricane hits and floods a large city, go ahead and set up camp there and let me know how it goes. Make sure to bring your guns, b/c you will need to find your own food and good luck surviving with A/C in 110 degree heat....Energy is a requirement for civil society in the modern age.

Energy is a bit of a big category. Electricity, and natural gas or heating oil for homes are one thing. Gasoline is another. Roads cost big bucks, and gas taxes are a fair way to pay for them.

Perhaps an energy luxury tax makes sense. No tax to a point, then tax excess use.

[Skyhi]

Energy is a bit of a big category. Electricity, and natural gas or heating oil for homes are one thing. Gasoline is another. Roads cost big bucks, and gas taxes are a fair way to pay for them.

Perhaps an energy luxury tax makes sense. No tax to a point, then tax excess use.

I like your idea.

[Bear Paws]

Energy is a bit of a big category. Electricity, and natural gas or heating oil for homes are one thing. Gasoline is another. Roads cost big bucks, and gas taxes are a fair way to pay for them.

Perhaps an energy luxury tax makes sense. No tax to a point, then tax excess use. Just homes? Not industry that provides the machinery and food for our civilization.. Yeah, yeah, I know ..tax the crap out of business instead..right..They got it..
40 years in business from partnership, S-corp to LLC and not once did my business ever pay a tax I didn't collect, most times up front, from the customer. THe customer being the eventual poor schlub working home owner buying what he believed to be tax free food and clothes that had a built in tax I passed on for him..

An excise tax... what a novel idea..Where a government feels entitled to share in a profit of a commodity simply because it can.

[froggigger]

Just homes? Not industry that provides the machinery and food for our civilization.. Yeah, yeah, I know ..tax the crap out of business instead..right..They got it..
40 years in business from partnership, S-corp to LLC and not once did my business ever pay a tax I didn't collect, most times up front, from the customer. THe customer being the eventual poor schlub working home owner buying what he believed to be tax free food and clothes that had a built in tax I passed on for him..

An excise tax... what a novel idea..Where a government feels entitled to share in a profit of a commodity simply because it can.

:thumbup::thumbup:

Some people just can't get it through their heads that taxes are overhead and are passed on like every other cost of doing business.

[Derwin0]

shocking :rolleyes:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDvu77pZr7k4

[Bear Paws]

shocking :rolleyes:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDvu77pZr7k4
Oh, you just find out?? I been spittin needles and nails for days over this. I'm waiting for the secret service to show up at my front door because of the slightly expletive E-mails I sent.

[HDRoberts]

shocking :rolleyes:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDvu77pZr7k4

Did you read the article? This proposal makes sense, even though I'm pretty anti-union.

Those in a collective bargaining agreement are stuck in contracts for a while. They negotiated wages and benefits under one set of rules, then the rules change. I think the statement from SEIU is pretty on point:


Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview that workers have often traded salary increases for better benefits in agreements.

Taxes “shouldn’t be taken from the backs of workers who have bargained away wages and other things for their benefits over the years,” Burger said.

Those without long term contracts, though, or individual contracts, can renegotiate to get more of their compensation as cash, as they both would be taxed.

Personally, I don't think the idea of ending employee provided health care is a bad idea, if they instead just give us the cash they had budgeted for our health care.

[Derwin0]

Did you read the article? This proposal makes sense, even though I'm pretty anti-union.

Those in a collective bargaining agreement are stuck in contracts for a while. They negotiated wages and benefits under one set of rules, then the rules change.
Bullshit. Taxes are not in any collective bargaining agreement. You don't see the Unions being exempt when income taxes go up or down. They shouldn't be exempt when health care taxes go up or down either. Taxes are taxes.
The Union isn't any more special then non-union people who have taken less pay for better benefits as well.

This is nothing more than the Democrats paying off their Union Base.

[Bear Paws]

Bullshit. Taxes are not in any collective bargaining agreement. You don't see the Unions being exempt when income taxes go up or down. They shouldn't be exempt when health care taxes go up or down either. Taxes are taxes.
The Union isn't any more special then non-union people who have taken less pay for better benefits as well.

This is nothing more than the Democrats paying off their Union Base. Exactly..
While we are at it.. Lets see if the left wants to give those with non-union employment contracts the same deferment..You know ...like junior and senior executives and contracted employees.

[HDRoberts]

Bullshit. Taxes are not in any collective bargaining agreement. You don't see the Unions being exempt when income taxes go up or down. They shouldn't be exempt when health care taxes go up or down either. Taxes are taxes.
The Union isn't any more special then non-union people who have taken less pay for better benefits as well.

This is nothing more than the Democrats paying off their Union Base.

You miss my point. There is a difference when taxes on wages go from 20% to 23% or something like that. This is benefits going from 0% to 15% or more. The point is, they negotiated contracts for more benefits knowing they are tax exempt. If they aren't, they may rather have the cash. But since they are locked into a contract, they can't change things. Benefits would begin being taxed with a new contract, as then they could renegotiate.

[Bear Paws]

You miss my point. There is a difference when taxes on wages go from 20% to 23% or something like that. This is benefits going from 0% to 15% or more. The point is, they negotiated contracts for more benefits knowing they are tax exempt. If they aren't, they may rather have the cash. But since they are locked into a contract, they can't change things. Benefits would begin being taxed with a new contract, as then they could renegotiate.
Then to be "fair" you will need to extend that exemption to everyone who is locked into a labor/employment contract. Regardless if the are union or not..THats the pay off.. The non-union employees that have employee contracts don't have a large single thugged out voting block.

All my employees had a contract with me..Even though they where "at will" employees ..It spelled out our responsibilities as well as the compensations and benefits.. It stated taxes was beyond our control and subject to change according to fed,state, local laws. I wouldn't be surprised that was in the union contracts.. If so... now even that contract can be rewritten by the White House?

[HDRoberts]

Then to be "fair" you will need to extend that exemption to everyone who is locked into a labor/employment contract. Regardless if the are union or not..

Fine with me. Just most non-union contracts are year by year or at least individual. They are more easily changed.