Health care victory

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-23-2010, 02:04 PM
hanratty21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frets

As for social security the more you pay in the more you get back at retirement.

Surely, you jest. The more I pay, I still plan on having nothing available by the time I can collect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frets

What does this mean to you?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/...92790#35992790

Are you making $250,000 a year if so it will cost 2.8 percent. Roughly $7000 a year.
Those making up to 100,000 anually will not see a tax increase.

I've not read line by line through the bill, but this video seems over-simplified. They don't mention anything between Family of Four earning 100,000 and Family of Four earning 250,000. What happens to those in between these numbers? As I mentioned above in my bullet points, it seems like I will be paying. Period.

Surely, congress jests.
03-23-2010, 02:20 PM
Loyal Rogue

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damaso

This is going to be a big dent to my paycheck.

Income = $$$$
- subtract Social Security = $$$
- subtract Medicare = $$$
- subtract My IRA = $$$
and now
- subtract Obamacare = $$$

Combine the clulessness pointed out by Frets with the term "Obamacare" and I'm going to make a wild guess... teabagger, right?

To add, chances are you/your parents/grandparents will also eventually end up or are already benefitting from that Medicare you are paying into.

Speaking of teabaggers, Gerbs nailed it.
Spitting on congressmen, shouting racist and hate slurs, throwing bricks through congressmen's windows, and waving signs that read "If Brown can't stop the bill, Browning (picture of a gun) will" / "Kill the bill OR ELSE".

I think the lunatic fringe is ready to snap and it's going to get ugly/deadly soon.
03-23-2010, 03:17 PM
david petley

<edit>removed because I don't care enough.

david
03-23-2010, 04:10 PM
jAQUAN

I'm sticking my neck out here HR but isn't it the effects of wall street taking advantage of capitalism that's causing you to lose faith that you'll see an ROI?
03-23-2010, 04:25 PM
Frets

Stock prices are up today.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10708...?kval=dontmiss
03-23-2010, 04:44 PM
hanratty21

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAQUAN

I'm sticking my neck out here HR but isn't it the effects of wall street taking advantage of capitalism that's causing you to lose faith that you'll see an ROI?

One thing has nothing whatsoever to do with the other. My investment in my own healthcare already exists. I work for a company which provides a tremendous plan which I pay for part of. The part my company pays for will now be a taxable event for me. In addition, I'll pay additional tax based on how good my plan is.

Evidently, I will now pay extra due to these facts.

Wall Street taking advantage of capitalism has nothing at all to do with paying for healthcare or my personal concerns thereof. As I said, I feel that there are more then enough reasons to provide healthcare to the masses, but I see myself being double taxed for an effort that Mr. Obama wants to hang his legacy on. I don't see how that is even remotely appropriate. I see myself in several years paying MORE for healthcare while getting less for it.

@Frets - in re: Stock Prices up...healthcare industry stocks were down. HMOs, Insurance, etc. All down. Tech, industry, materials...up. Again...nothing whatsoever to do with the other thing.
03-23-2010, 04:51 PM
jAQUAN

What did you mean by this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hanratty21

The more I pay, I still plan on having nothing available by the time I can collect.
03-23-2010, 04:58 PM
hanratty21

Ah - that was in reference to a Social Security comment, I believe. Again...another misplaced discussion in the Health Care thread. If we add SS into this discussion, it'll get insanely disjointed.
03-23-2010, 05:12 PM
gerbick
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanratty21

So, all 'victory' rhetoric aside...I've stayed out of this discussion until now. I don't consider myself rich by any means, but I have a comfortable life and have worked hard to get there. That being said, I really don't like to have to pay into a system that, while I agree needs change, is going to cause me any financial hardship. I have a tremendous medical plan through my employer and never take advantage of it in any way. We see doctors, we get prescriptions, we pay co-pays/out of pockets, etc. We follow the rules. According to the 'plan' the following two bullet points really stand out.

2011
-- Requires employers to report the value of health care benefits on employees' W-2 tax statements.
2018
-- Imposes a tax on employer-sponsored health insurance worth more than $10,200 for individual coverage, $27,500 for a family plan. The tax is 40 percent of the value of the plan above the thresholds, indexed for inflation.

So, in 2011, I will have more taxable income without any additional take home pay. I now owe more in taxes because I work for a company that is doing the right thing. Odd, to say the least.

Then, in 2018, another tax on the fact that I have a good health plan. If I pay it, I take it in the can. If my employer does, there is less incentive for them to offer such a good plan. Either way, I take it prison style again.

So, to all you fans of change...I am all for people getting medical coverage, but this one smells like a lose/lose for me. To all of those who'd like to throw me into the far right hate mongering category, I will state right here that I am a registered republican, but I'd probably call myself about as socially conservative as Bill Clinton would've been called a far left liberal. I believe in Capitalism as it creates opportunities for those willing to work for them, but, according to this, I see nothing but a tariff on my hard work and effort.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...JKCG.DTL&tsp=1
Bingo!

The bolded part of HR's statement, I agree with almost all stated, but that part especially. I do not feel like this was the way to get things done. The need for an overhaul, needed. The fact this doesn't look like a win-win, sticks with me.

And I'm also a registered republican (that's never voted straight ticket though) and this sorta smacks me in the face as a triumph with a lot faults that will cause problems down the line.

I like the gesture, not liking the outcome.
03-23-2010, 05:23 PM
hanratty21

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerbick

...I'm also a registered republican...

teabagger.
03-23-2010, 05:50 PM
gerbick

Quote:

Originally Posted by hanratty21

teabagger.

your mother was supposed to keep that secret.
03-23-2010, 05:53 PM
hanratty21

^ ^ ^
I don't think there's a font size small enough for that one.

</zing>
03-23-2010, 10:28 PM
gerbick

Damn you.
03-23-2010, 10:53 PM
jAQUAN

I definitely need to learn more about it but so far the mandate leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. I refuse to ever consider myself a member of a political party but the Democrats for the first time in a while are looking more dumb than republicans are apathetic. Still I'm not near as embarassed to be an American or afraid for the constitution as I was troughout the Bush era.
03-23-2010, 11:37 PM
Loyal Rogue

There's a lot about this bill that leaves a bad taste in my mouth as well.
I can only hold out hope that this is a small first step at working towards a real universal single-payer option.

Will Rogers said it best.
"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
03-24-2010, 12:15 AM
atRax

Face it.

Too big to fail + Health care == Social system || Community all together a little more
We'll see if USA can stand by itself now.. your in control.

Just a tip: "Ask everyone 10$ to go see the doctor and you will end up with shorter Queue if not in a couple of years your going to wait to see a doctor and put some money in stocks for healthcare research".

In the end I hope less fat people will walk around.

And you guys pay waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to high for Prescription drugs or any kind of service in the field since your Life expectancy is not good enough for what you pay
03-25-2010, 06:40 AM
FlashLackey

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAQUAN

At least the sides taken in the Civil War were clearly defined. I doubt most republicans even know what they're mad about. I saw a bumper sticker the other day (on my way to work) that read, "Republicans: We work hard, so you don't have to." Infuriating.

I just can't get past the irony that the fear mongering is headed by the richest and most educated bankers/insurance giants yet enlists the dumbest most close minded lemmings as their base.

I think that these two statements contradict each other. Bankers and insurance companies are major contributors to the Democratic party. So, wouldn't it be Democrats that are mixed up about what to be mad about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hanratty21

...
So, to all you fans of change...I am all for people getting medical coverage, but this one smells like a lose/lose for me. To all of those who'd like to throw me into the far right hate mongering category, I will state right here that I am a registered republican, but I'd probably call myself about as socially conservative as Bill Clinton would've been called a far left liberal. I believe in Capitalism as it creates opportunities for those willing to work for them, but, according to this, I see nothing but a tariff on my hard work and effort.

Well stated. If we were to focus on ways to make health care less expensive, it would be easier to cover everyone without creating an unnecessary burden on our collective economy. This plan wasn't devised to most efficiently accomplish the stated goals. It was devised to accomplish the goals in a way that was most politically advantageous for Democrats, regardless of additional costs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue

To add, chances are you/your parents/grandparents will also eventually end up or are already benefitting from that Medicare you are paying into.

Medicare funding is being reduced to pay for Obama's plan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue

Speaking of teabaggers, Gerbs nailed it.
Spitting on congressmen, shouting racist and hate slurs, throwing bricks through congressmen's windows, and waving signs that read "If Brown can't stop the bill, Browning (picture of a gun) will" / "Kill the bill OR ELSE".

There are always people on both sides of a national debate that do or say indefensible things. Do we really need to degrade this debate by pointing out the stupidest behavior involved (liberal stupidity is available in abundance too)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerbick

The bolded part of HR's statement, I agree with almost all stated, but that part especially. I do not feel like this was the way to get things done. The need for an overhaul, needed. The fact this doesn't look like a win-win, sticks with me.

And I'm also a registered republican (that's never voted straight ticket though) and this sorta smacks me in the face as a triumph with a lot faults that will cause problems down the line.

I like the gesture, not liking the outcome.

Couldn't agree more with every point. There were better plans proposed to cover everyone and reduce prices.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue

I can only hold out hope that this is a small first step at working towards a real universal single-payer option.

Hopefully not. Then our quality of care will go down as indicated by relative cancer survival rates in countries with single-payer systems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by atRax

And you guys pay waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to high for Prescription drugs or any kind of service in the field since your Life expectancy is not good enough for what you pay

If you adjust for non health-care related deaths (car accidents, murders, etc.) our life expectancy is amongst the best in the world. We certainly have problems to sort out. However, the evidence indicates that quality of health care is not one of them.
03-25-2010, 09:35 AM
jAQUAN

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

I think that these two statements contradict each other. Bankers and insurance companies are major contributors to the Democratic party. So, wouldn't it be Democrats that are mixed up about what to be mad about?

They are major contributors to both parties in order to retain influence over any administration. I don't believe for a second that the soft money is given in support of anyones agenda but their own. Not to defend the democrats who seem more addicted to legacy building than Bush did.

I agree with the general sentiment here that its good to focus on this aggressively and this is an important foot in the door but that the democrats may have just compromised themselves right out of office.
03-25-2010, 10:00 AM
silverx2

can anyone tell me if this is better or worse then the initial health plan that was suggested?
03-25-2010, 11:00 AM
gerbick

It's better than what we have, just more expensive in the long-run. Folks are really upset in some cases over 10% increases if they're hit.

And the so-called "options" offered by people was truly non-existent. They said they existed, but those Loch Ness type of offers really were empty and not fully thought out. Stalling techniques of the long-winded.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page