HEALTHCARE UPHELD!

Page 6 of 8 [ 124 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

04 Jul 2012, 7:08 am

ruveyn wrote:

The Poor will have to learn to exercise, stop smoking (or not start to smoke), not to indulge in alcohol, not to eat and drink nutritionally dubious food and to guard their bodies carefully. Isn't that just horrid?

You can do all those things and still need health care. I can't say I do the other things but I don't smoke or drink.

6 years ago I had to have my appendix out and the bills added up to $25,000. I don't think there was anything I could have done to avoid that.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Jul 2012, 7:27 am

ruveyn wrote:

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:

Whatever happens with health care, it will just be really expensive and out of reach of the poor, just like it is now. States are already figuring out ways to get out of expanding Medicaid. Parts of this health care act that could really help people who need it the most - the poor without insurance - are just going to get hacked away while the expensive penalties and taxes will remain, not to mention expensive policies.

So if you do all those things, you never need a doctor? I have discovered the plant based diet though, and admit if everyone were on it, Americans would all be much healthier than they are eating animal and plant products.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,614
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Jul 2012, 8:44 am

Dantac wrote:

Obama's health care plan was very good when he proposed it. Then the congress and all the special interest groups turned it into this bloated joke that only helps the wealthy corps get ridiculously wealthier AND gives them carte blanche to increase fees at will and lower service quality.

The insurance is to be forced upon people in 2014. I'm working real hard to get the heck out of the USA before then. I'm not sure if they'll ask me to pay for that insurance if I live overseas ...if they do they can have my citizenship back and good riddance.

unless you go to a third-world nation [which america is headed for itself, just wait a while] chances are you will have to pay taxes to support national mandatory universal health care [which all western nations 'cept for amuurica have in one form or another]. so if you are philosophically prone to rugged individualism you will not quite get what you want if you kick america to the curb to live elsewhere.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Jul 2012, 10:17 am

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:

[
So if you do all those things, you never need a doctor? I have discovered the plant based diet though, and admit if everyone were on it, Americans would all be much healthier than they are eating animal and plant products.

Not so. You would be less likely to need a doctor and than mostly for accidents like burns, cuts and broken bones which are relatively inexpensive to treat.

Setting bones and stitching up cuts is relatively low tech medicine. People have been doing that for thousands of years.

ruveyn

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,614
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Jul 2012, 10:29 am

ruveyn wrote:

Setting bones and stitching up cuts is relatively low tech medicine. People have been doing that for thousands of years.

maybe "low tech" but still largely unaffordable to the working class for whom a typical ER visit would cost several months' take-home pay. (clicky)THIS is why your stitches cost $1500!

(clicky)and this also!

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Jul 2012, 12:07 pm

ruveyn wrote:

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:

People get infections and need to see a doctor. What about preventative screenings?

johnny77
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,274

04 Jul 2012, 12:16 pm

auntblabby wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Setting bones and stitching up cuts is relatively low tech medicine. People have been doing that for thousands of years.

I clear 1120 a month I had to drop my heath care to afford the bills. Two night ago I sat at my computer stand stitching my own hand because of the ridiculous amount that it would cost down to the E.R. I still don't want this bill, it passes a lot off expense to states that are all ready near bankrupt. This is some of the supposed saving that the politician tout. A person would have to be pretty thick to thank adding any thing in government will save money. You will pay for it in the end. 75% off the money comes from families under 35000 a year on top of the increases in taxes from the states that will have to increase revenues to cover the extra expense.

A better solution would have been to offer affordable health plans to the public to compete with health insurance companies. This would have reduced prices via competition. At a far better cost to the tax payer.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,614
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Jul 2012, 12:46 pm

johnny77 wrote:

A better solution would have been to offer affordable health plans to the public to compete with health insurance companies. This would have reduced prices via competition. At a far better cost to the tax payer.

mitch moneybags mcconnell, when asked [by chris wallace] about covering the uninsured, admitted "that is not the issue." when wallace asked again about covering the uninsured, moneybags mcconnell said "let me tell you what we're not going to do- we're not going to turn the american health care system into a western european system." IOW the repubs don't give a damn about the uninsured, they see 'em all as disposables to be kicked to the curb rather than allowed to see a doctor when they are ill, like working class people are allowed to do in most of the rest of the world.

johnny77
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,274

04 Jul 2012, 1:12 pm

This is why I get so frustrated when people think this has any thing to do with health care not with taking away rights. Have a bank account this act gives them direct access to it.

AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,665
Location: Houston, Texas

04 Jul 2012, 4:10 pm

johnny77 wrote:

. . . A better solution would have been to offer affordable health plans to the public to compete with health insurance companies. This would have reduced prices via competition. At a far better cost to the tax payer.

This is the public option.

This is similar to the Tennessee Valley Authority strategy. Set up a demonstration program to see how cheaply it can be done and with what quality. And then when insurance companies say, we just can't do it, we have some data and we can carry the conversation forward.

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,939

04 Jul 2012, 5:51 pm

johnny77 wrote:

This is why I get so frustrated when people think this has any thing to do with health care not with taking away rights. Have a bank account this act gives them direct access to it.

If you are talking about the penalty, the IRS has no authority to access anyone's bank account to collect the penalty; this action is excluded per the act, where it states no criminal penalties, levies or liens will be imposed. If one has a tax refund coming and they owe the penalty, they won't ever see that portion of the refund in their bank account, because it will not ever get there.

It's not that hard to avoid that if one takes the effort to adjust their bank account.

Above and beyond this if you clear 1120 a month, chances are you are going to be covered by medicaid as long as your total annual income does not exceed $15,100, per the subsidy calculator provided in another post. What this means is no premiums, and likely no co-pays, if your state is kind enough to participate in the study.

Beyond that if your employer's premium is over 8% of your income, you have an exemption against purchasing the insurance and paying a penalty.

The best case scenario is that at this point it looks like you will receive free coverage in 2014, given a similar income level.

AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,665
Location: Houston, Texas

05 Jul 2012, 4:44 pm

aghogday wrote:

. . . Beyond that if your employer's premium is over 8% of your income, you have an exemption against purchasing the insurance and paying a penalty. . .

Or, if someone is vulnerable to the penalty, he or she can simply avoid it be artfully adjusting tax withholding.

A lot of details. It's heck being a rebel, someone not wanting to go along with a particular system, whatever that system may be.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,614
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Jul 2012, 8:49 pm

going bare [no health insurance] absent at least a million disposable dollars in the bank, is financially risky.

AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,665
Location: Houston, Texas

05 Jul 2012, 9:27 pm

aghogday wrote:

. . . But no one has the ability to build the road on their own, it takes the combined effort of citizens of states and across the nation to make it happen.

The issue with health care is it is getting too expensive for citizens to purchase on their own and it is seen as a necessity for the welfare of the nation. There was no choice but to address a crisis in society, and health is certainly as important as roads for the general welfare of citizens in the US. . .

Some years ago, I was listening to a book on tape by Bob Costas about baseball. He was addressing the issue of big-market teams, small-market teams. And he presented the idea of a revenue split where the home team gets 55% and the visiting team 45%, for Yankee fans aren't paying to watch the Yankees run drills. There really is another team.

It got me thinking that the highest individual tax rate during ordinary times should be 45% (leaving aside the question of what constitutes non-ordinary times). For Bill Gates is not on an island selling computers to fishes, there really are other people involved. And Microsoft benefits from a road system, an education system, national defense, a court system which enforces patents (overly strictly in clunky manner), etc.

And the U.S. individual tax system is actually pretty good, first chunk of income taxed at 10%, next chunk at 15%, up to a maximum rate of 33 or 35%. Now, I have read that the U.S. corporate rate, which used to be among the lowest in the world, is now among the highest because so many other countries have reduced their rates.

Now, all this said, I think a person can still object to complexity and legislation which primarily overlays a new layer of complexity on an already complex system.

And I've never liked the part of Form 1040 which states " . . under penalties of perjury . . ," seems like it ups the ante in a way it doesn't need to.

WintersTale
Sea Gull

Joined: 31 Aug 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 204
Location: Ohio USA

05 Jul 2012, 11:12 pm

I am grateful that it was upheld. Obamacare allows me to get my medication, since I don't have insurance...I am fed up with Republicans telling me that I don't have the right to be healthy, since I am out of work because of a disability.

_________________
?If you love large, you've got to hurt large. If you've got a lot of light, you've probably got an equal amount of darkness.? - Sarah McLachlan

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

06 Jul 2012, 12:22 am

johnny77 wrote:

THAT was the original purpose of the health care bill. The gov. would offer its own insurance to compete with private insurance companies. It would've allowed the costs to the individuals to lower dramatically for basic health care and prevention services (including medications).

The pharma and health industry execs however did not like it. That's why the entire bill got twisted into the current 'force people into the jaws of private insurance companies' thus increasing their profits and giving them a free hand to lower services rendered. Its business after all.

What really irritates me of the current bill is that there are thousands if not millions of people who already handed over their medical information to these private insurance companies, disclosed any and all existing and pre-existing conditions which in times past would've been enough to be charged a ridiculously high premium for and/or deny paying services... under the 'promise' that they would be covered regardless.

...but were not told the private companies would have every right to still charge them much higher premiums. And now they are FORCED to get such an insurance. If the law gets shot down these people are still screwed since the insurance companies will already have access to their medical info (shared widely under new law).

The whole thing was twisted to benefit the health care companies not the people it allegedly was to help.

Page 6 of 8 [ 124 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

HEALTHCARE UPHELD! Post Reply New Topic

HEALTHCARE UPHELD!