I feel accomplished
Member
Hope and change
I hope they do not find out I am a total Dumbass.
Change I will rewrite the constitution and just do it my way. And to hell with the American people.
Knowledgeable Member
this has to be the worst bill ever proposed....
and its going to pass.....
Senior Member
I feel accomplished
did anybody notice he wouldn't answer a single question?
I feel accomplished
how can a trillion dollar healthcare bill reduce the deficit by $138 billion over 10 years?
how do you spend a trillion and save money?
duh, you don't, you have to raise taxes
Democrats delayed most of the major spending provisions until 2014 to make the bill appear cheaper over the CBO’s 10 year budget window; claimed as revenue premiums from a new long-term insurance program, even though that same money is supposed to pay off future benefits; and it siphoned nearly $19.4 billion from an unrelated student loan bill.
For the first time, the Medicare payroll tax would be applied to investment income, beginning in 2013. A new 3.8 percent tax would be imposed on interest, dividends, capital gains and other investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.
The bill also would increase the Medicare payroll tax by 0.9 percentage point to 2.35 percent on wages above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.
40 percent tax on health benefits would be delayed until 2018 and would apply only to premiums exceeding $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families.
The search for revenue to pay for health care has been made more difficult by Obama's campaign pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. The result is a bill that would raise a total of $438 billion in new taxes over the next decade, mainly from high-income taxpayers and fees on the health care industry.
The new Medicare taxes would raise an estimated $210 billion over the next decade. The new tax on investments would be on top of capital gains and dividends tax increases already proposed by Obama. The president wants to increase the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends from 15 percent to 20 percent. If Congress goes along, the new top rate would be 23.8 percent in 2013, when the health care taxes kick in.
— The new tax on high-cost insurance plans, $32 billion.
— A fee on the makers and importers of brand-name drugs, $27 billion.
— An excise tax on the makers and importers of certain medical devices, $20 billion.
— An annual fee on health insurance providers, starting in 2014, $60 billion.
— The repeal of a tax loophole that could allow paper manufacturers to get tax credits for generating alternative fuel in the paper making process, $24 billion.
Democrats argue that high-income families fared well under tax cuts enacted in the past decade, so it's time to pay up. Republicans argue that many of those taxpayers are small business owners struggling to stay afloat.
"I have no problem with it," Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., said of the new Medicare taxes. "Income is income. Most Americans work by the hour, get paid by the hour. Some other people get their money in other ways but it's still income."
I feel accomplished
to be clear what that means...we get 10years of raised taxes and 6 years of health care reform to show less deficit.Originally Posted by Kratos
taxes go up as soon as the bill passes.
Associate Member
I am not saying I disagree with you, but the "how do we lower the deficit by introducing a trillion in new spending?" question is a red herring and not conducive to productive debate on the subject. Obviously, other programs will be replaced by this bill, and that is how they are proposing costs will actually be cut.
Again, I am not saying I disagree with you necessarily, but there are other points that are more worthy of discussion such as the constitutionality of requiring all Americans to purchase health care.
I feel accomplished
No, it is not a red herring. I suggest you go back to school and learn your fallacies.
I'm not detracting for the issue at hand here. I'm introducing the issue that any claim of budget reduction is related to an increase in taxes and not the reform measures.
The CBO rates the bill's cost at 1 trillion...if I were to rate it, it would be much higher. I don't expect it to come in on budget.
And the tax increases are in the bill. I've listed them for all to see.
where is the fallacy?
This bill costs money, the money is proposed to be paid for through tax increases. True statement. Stop trying to sound smart, it isn't working.
Associate Member
And why don't you stop acting like an asshole? You've obviously got your mind made up and aren't actually interested in discussion. You just want to preach. And I am not interested in being preached to.
And how dare you imply I am uneducated. You have no idea who I am, and I can assure you I am likely far more educated than you. So get off your high horse.
Conversation over.
I feel accomplished
so, tax medicare more to make up the deficit...um, you can't tax medicare more and then steal from a nearly bankrupt program...it doesn't work like that.
atax high cost insurance plans...who's gonna be buying a 20k insurance plan anymore when they can just pay the small penalty and be covered by obama care
in fact what businesses are going to provide health insurance when the penalty is cheaper?
so...tax drug makes, medical devices, and health insurance providers...won't that add to the cost of health care that this same bill is providing?
Last edited by Kratos; 03-19-2010 at 09:31 AM.
I feel accomplished
"it sets up a NEW COMPETITIVE HEALTH INSURANCE MARKET giving tens of millions of Americans the exact same insurance choices the members of Congress will have."
he keeps repeating that like a mantra
well fvck shitty that's crazy, you're going to give me insurance as good as members of congress...I'll be treated like royalty. I'll walk into a hospital and the nurses will postitute themselves to me and bill it to insurance. It will be awesome.
but wait, wtf does that mean?
does anybody know?
no, they don't
it means you are welcome to go into your pocket for an ass load and buy some decent insurance, should you decide to do so.
I feel accomplished
more taxes always = more money for the gvmt right?
not always,
if taxes are 100%, would you bother to work to give all of it to the gvmt? Could you afford to buy any consumer goods or participate in the market economy?
of course not.
diminishing returns, eventually negative returns for increased taxes
it's a bell curve, and many economists feel we're already on the back side of the bell
Stephen Entin and colleagues estimates that the investment tax would depress GDP by about 1.3% and reduce capital formation by 3.4%, and thus reduce the after-tax incomes of everyone not paying the tax directly in the neighborhood of 1.1% to 1.2%. Labor productivity and wages would fall across the board, while the lost government revenues from the more-sluggish economy would offset the expected receipts.
JIM CRAMER: I think this is a bill where if you get amnesty, it goes into law, you get amnesty. You break the budget. That means we're going to see 50-60% federal tax—I'm not kidding. And I also think we see capital gains and dividends being taxed at ordinary income rate. I know the bill doesn't say that now --
Knowledgeable Member
^^^^^^^^^
that is how they estimate it will lower the deficit.
they have 72 hours to read a 2700 page bill before a vote....
i like how the LA purchase will help the earthquake victims in Hawaii?
what the fvk was that?
I feel accomplished
hasn't been a earthquake in hawaii since 2006
I'd like to know how much extra burden is still on the medicaid system from Katrina. In real dollars that is...healthcare only.
200 billion in federal aid not to mention several billion in private contributions
how much are they short?
I feel accomplished
are we terminally stupid enough to think spending an estimated trillion dollars is good for the budget?
“SIS PACIS INSTRUO PRO BELLUM”
We are screwed.
Best
T
Banned
Hey... I'm from Europe... and to be honest it sounds like a 3rd world thing to me for people not to be able to get medical care because they can't afford it.
This was going to hit America sooner or later. Really, you guys were living in barbaric times. The rest of the world has free medical care.
AR-Elite Hall of Famer
Your medical care is not "Free" per se..... you don't get directly charged for medial care...... but your taxes are higher..... so you actually indirectly pay for your medical care.
Here in america..... medical coverage is an option. You don't want it.... you don't have to have it. You can do what you want with your money instead of the government taking it and making you have healthcare.
~Haz~
Banned
Is "medical coverage" really such a bad thing to force on people?
That's a serious question.
Let's say you've been saving up for a truck and you've got $15k, and then your appendix decides to get inflamed. That's your savings down the drain.
Even worse, let's say your appendix gets inflamed and you simply don't have any money saved up.
Or imagine you get diagnosed with lung cancer and you've got no money.
Or you're doing squats, you tear some cartilage, and you haven't got the money to get it fixed.
Where I'm from, in Britain, these things don't happen. You go to the hospital, you get treated, you leave. They don't chase you down with a bill for thousands of pounds.
Maybe the transition to free healthcare will be a bumpy ride for the USA... but it's a ride you all would have to take at some stage... there was always going to be a point when a wealthy, civilised society would evolve to provide free healthcare for the people who can't afford it.
~VET~ Extraordinaire~
im not saying this bill is good.
but im a diabetic and cant get health insurance in my state. Every company deines me becasue of it.
What am i supposed to do?
Snook~ AR Lounge Monitor
Nice nickname.
AR-Elite Hall of Famer
Honestly..... both systems have their problems......
However..... I think this new bill is going to fvck us royally.... ah well..... atleast I can say I didn't vote him in.....
~Haz~
Knowledgeable Member
x2
Was he voted in?
My long term goal for the next 10 years is to bank/hide what I can, invest in non US and get the fvck out in 10 years or less.
100% American Beef
I am actually worried about the direction we are headed
New Member
*a.. The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.*
*b.. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.*
*c.. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.*
*d.. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.*
*e.. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.*
*f.. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.*
*g.. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.*
*You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.*
*AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM? *
*IT'S NOT ABOUT THE NEED FOR GOOD HEALTH CARE, IT'S ABOUT TRUSTING THE GOVERNMENT TO RUN IT!*
Associate Member
Patently false. The government has not failed in everything it has done. Again, not saying I disagree with you in principal, but this is another red herring that doesn't help your position and alienates those who would otherwise be inclined to be persuaded by more logical arguments. It's just more empty rhetoric.
Knowledgeable Member
It's all stupid. The uninsured, poor, welfare, illegal immigrants already have free health-care. They go into any emergency and get free care.
It's the middle class who has always been screwed who if you get cancer or??? your insurance stops and you dont get help until every single asset you have worked for is gone or you are dead.
In the future you will just die because it will take you months to get diagnosed or in to see a doctor, the few that are left practicing.
AR-Elite Hall of Famer
I'm not saying our current system is great..... Lord knows it needs some work but having "universale healthcare" just isn't a good idea. Healthcare is going to suffer greatly..... longer waits.... cheaper treatments..... just overall shittier care.
Now here is where the two sides collide..... The group with health coverage doesn't want to risk the coverage they have now and get shittier coverage. Those without coverage think a shitty coverage is better than no coverage.....
What needs to happen is these insurance companies need to stop banking billions and billions of dollars. Imagine if health insurance was "non-profit"
~Haz~
I feel accomplished
exactly...either we have to demand less from our healthcare system in the form of services...or we have to pay more.
all the profits of the health insurance companies combined add up to 1 day out of the 365 days a year of premiums.
if health insurance companies are so damn inefficent, why does medicare contract with them to process claims?
"Rock" of Love ;)
Why would treatments be cheaper and why would care be shittier?
I'm assuming by "cheaper" you mean they would be spending fewer dollars on your care.
Dulce bellum inexpertis
No, he indeed means care will be of a lower quality. I shall explain...
This is an area that I have studied heavily, in addition to presenting research in this area as well (not published). I have a B.A. in Political Science with a focus in Constitutional Law and Interpretation. However, as far as policy goes, health care policy is an area that I spend a lot of time researching, writing, and presenting information on (as well as dabbling somewhat in economics).
While we may not have a crystal ball to predict the outcomes and consequences of this bill, our best indicator of what will happen is to look to the past. This is how our entire society operates in all facets of life, including our judicial system. We use phrases such as "Net us never forget about the Holocaust, so that history never repeats itself." We incarcerate people for short or long periods of time based on their PAST actions and outcomes, in order to predict what they MAY do in the future.
History in the United States has PROVEN to us that there is an undeniable, undisputed, simple equation that occurs when government gets involved in ANY area of the private sector. COSTS GO UP, AND QUALITY GOES DOWN. Government bureaucrats are simply not smart enough to be the best allocator of resources. They are not smart enough to run the economy, etc, and so on. I challenge anyone to name just ONE private sector enterprise the government has taken over and either made profitable, or run better than the private sector had been running it previously?
United States Postal Service? Run at a deficit every year. FedEx, DHL, UPS, turn enormous profits each year, and provide an equal or better service.
Railways? The government took over this private sector enterprise, they claimed they would only own it for 3 years and they would turn a projected profit. They never sold it, and it has been run at a deficit EVERY SINGLE YEAR SINCE GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP.
INSURANCE
Insurance is a measure of "RISK." You pay a monthly or yearly fee, along with many other people who belong to your insurance company, in case something catastrophic happens, you will be covered. It counts on X number of people not having a catastrophic incident, while measuring and accounting for Y number of people having a catastrophic incident. Rates and coverage of course are based on the level of risk that each insured presents.
"Forcing" insurance companies to cover people for their pre-existing medical conditions is ABSURD! Let me give you an analogous situation. It would be akin to Congress passing a bill that says car insurance companies must cover cars for damages incurred PRIOR to them holding an insurance policy with that company. If your car was set on fire a month ago and sustained major damage, you could then apply for an insurance policy with State Farm, have it issued, and then submit a claim for the full amount of the damages for your car being on fire at a time prior to your insurance policy with that company. Does that make sense to anyone? Is that even logical? Of course not, however most liberals do not care much for logic anyway.
Furthermore, what we know was "health insurance" is not actually insurance at all. Health insurance companies cover FAR too much of the costs and routine health maintenance than they should. As stated previously, INSURANCE is for catastrophic incidences and accidents. It is not the responsibility of insurance to cover routine maintenance, wear and tear, etc. People have become too accustomed to expecting to pay $5,$10,$20 for office visits to their doctor, whilst the health insurance company picks up the tab for $75-$125 per visit. The insured views the service as relatively "free" and therefore has no INCENTIVE to use the service less. This results in people making doctors appointments for every runny nose, hang nail, etc, and so forth. So quite simply, if insurance covered less mundane things, it would cost less. It would also provide incentives for people to be more thrift conscious. Health insurance policies should cover emergency room visits(for legitimate emergencies) and surgeries, and that's about it. Premiums would cost considerably less, and individuals and families would be able to purchase health insurance plans that are not tied to their employers.
DEFENSIVE MEDICINE
One of the key issues plaguing the American health care system is tort reform. Doctors are forced to order unnecessary tests to cover their ass's from ambulance chasing lawyers. A few big lawsuits can result in them being uninsureable, and essentially out of the job. This, as I understand it, is not part of the bill.
Health care is NOT A RIGHT
The most important reason to be against this bill is because health care is not a "RIGHT." In the United States, we have rights which are enumerated in the bill of rights. They are all "negative freedoms," meaning they are a list of things that the government is RESTRAINED from being able to do. Freedom of speech, the government is restrained from being able to infringe upon it. The right to bear arms, the government is restrained from being able to deny people the right to own firearms. Search and seizure, the government is restrained from being able to search a person, their home, or their vehicle at will. It is set up this way, because you are assumed to be BORN with these rights, you are endowed with them by your creator, therefore the government cannot "GIVE" you your right, you already have them. All that the Bill of Rights does, is acknowledge these rights as existing, being ordained to you by your creator, and a written document that says that your government can never take these rights away.
Therefore, it is impossible that you are "BORN" with a RIGHT to health care. Health care is a SERVICE, and it is a service that must be PROVIDED by another person, a skilled person that we call health care practitioners. If we conceded that you have a "RIGHT" to health care, we are essentially saying you have a RIGHT to that persons service for free, or perhaps at any rate YOU wish to pay them, but which they have no control over. Therefore, you would automatically be infringing on the rights of that person to choose who they offer their service to. You don't have the "RIGHT" to own a house, or the "RIGHT" to a job.
Additionally, it is morally wrong if the government steals my money (taxation) in order to pay for your health care. The only original two approved types of taxation were excise taxes and apportioned taxes. Excise taxes were on certain goods like cigarettes, gas, etc, that a person could opt out of by not smoking or riding a bicycle. Apportioned taxes would be redistributed among the people equally after they were collected. Un apportioned taxes, are those which end up being spent on social welfare programs. It is important to reject any notion of "moral hazard" or "social responsibility." It is not an individual citizens responsibility to have their hard earned income stolen(taxed) in order to pay for another citizens health care, housing, or food. That is not compassionate. This is what charity in our society is for.
I am likely going to get a lot of "emotional" responses to what I've said, and likely they will be from uneducated people who have not studied these issues in depth to know that, all social welfare programs given enough time fail(they go bankrupt, and then NO ONE gets services), and that innovation and progress slows down significantly when there are no large profits motivating research and development of new drugs, technologies, and practices. It is unfortunate, many have bought into the propaganda that we are "BARBARIC" if we do not guarantee health care to every citizen by stealing the income of other productive citizens in order to pay for that health care.
HEALTH CARE IS NOT A RIGHT
AR-Elite Hall of Famer
Look at our food industry......
We have a choice of what food we want to eat. We can pay more for organic and whole grain foods which are better for us or we can go cheaper and buy the meat with hormones added..... fast food..... etc. Lets just say the government now takes over our food industry and it tells you what kind of food you will eat. Do you think the government will supply the entire nation with organic and whole grain foods? HELL NO - it would be too expensive.....
Our health coverage will be run by a government that can't fix current problems.....
~Haz~
Knowledgeable Member
I know that universal health care is a very sensitive topic in the States right now but I sometimes wonder if it's been blown up far worse than it actually is.
The word "Healthcare" seems to be banded about freely in conjunction with the word "socialism" and while I know there are many educated and intelligent members on the board, i'd wage that a large percentage of people that use the word "socialism" have no idea what the word actually means, mostly in part to heavy hitting TV personalities back in the 1950's suggesting that words like "socialism" were two rungs under "communism", right under a full blown third reich.
Maybe it's because im from a country where this is the norm, but no, you wont be left to die in hospital waiting rooms.
And Universal Healthcare will not lead to "You shall not eat zist greasy BigMac unt penalty of execution!"
Im pretty sure that every other Western country has universal healthcare and no one else is being starved to death or oppressed.
I feel accomplished
all is not equal between the US and UK, so it can't be assumed what works there works here.
one variable alone can break a system
for example malpractice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1246737/
but we're gonna go ahead and leave tort reform off the table.
AR-Elite Hall of Famer
For the record..... I currently have no health coverage......
~Haz~
I feel accomplished
what haapens if you make the cost the same for pre existing conditions?
if the penelty is cheaper than getting insurance...just wait to get sick
New York provides an object lesson: It enacted precisely these "reforms" in 1993. The next year, roughly 500,000 people canceled their insurance, according to a study by the actuarial firm of Milliman & Robertson.
With the young and healthy dropping out of the insurance pool, premiums will have to rise to cover the now-sicker insured population. That, in turn, will encourage more healthy people to drop out, raising premiums still further — and so on, in what's known as the "adverse-selection death spiral."
Banned
Honestly I have no idea whats going on, I know the bills were passed an all but who cares if they tax brand name drug importers/manufacturers?
These industries have money like oil, and their greedy fvckn bastards, tax them till they go bankrupt for all I care.
I've been ordering all my medicine overseas for years now, its cheaper, less bs, and it detaches you from a lot of the bs US likes to put you through. I think the entire health care system if fvcked no matter how we deal with health insurance.
And we already have free health care for millions of immigrants so who really cares? These mfkrs have been raping our health care for years and years cause they don't give a shit about their credit, at least now americans will have similar.
And seriously everytime we make a change people always wanna flip out, whine bitch and complain about a system thats already broke and already doesn't work right.
You can tax people for farting for all I care, I'd prefer for us to lose all our money so another country that knows how to manage finances can beat us in a war and take over our government. Its like going for a swim in a pool full of shit, then complaining when someone takes a piss in it.. wtf?
America has been doomed since the day we thought we reached "independence", I have no patriotism, and no real concern what happens to this country, I'm a wonderful american I know.
I should also mention I don't know a damn thing about politics, so if I sound like an ignorant naive sob, thats most likely why.
Anabolic Member
I thought I would chime in on this one, since I'm probably the biggest Obama supporter on this forum.
Anyway, I'm not thrilled about this bill, but, IMO, the opposition to this bill wasn't because it was a bad bill, but mainly just a ploy by the opposition party to block Obama's main campaign intiative. If Obama didn't get this passed, in any form, he couldn't put any teeth into any other proposals. No one came up with any alternatives and just continued to say that we should start over. Well we've waisted enough time on this, let's get something done.
Now with that said, this bill is far from perfect. But what bill is? I can't stand all the dealing to get this done, but I'm glad something is being done. The question remains, though, is this going to bankrupt up faster that the current system? Because we know, the current system isn't sustainable.
How many people, truly know the details of this bill, because as studied as I am in politics, I'm not completely sure either? I've already read stuff from people on this thread, that isn't correct (government controlled healthcare), so until we get the details about this bill, there will be fear and anxiety and people are using misinformation to intensify the rhetoric against this bill. Most people are against this bill because of that misinformation, BUT, the vast majority of people want healthcare reform. But I don't think anyone will be happy with the final outcome, regardless of what it is.
I feel accomplished
There are no cost cutting measures as far as the total cost of health care spent in this country aside from the medicare cuts.
So, yes adding people to the system costs money.
....
and no preventative care doesn't save you money
Last edited by Kratos; 03-22-2010 at 12:24 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote