ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

[tdans]

agreed.. this idea of socialized health care will ruin what we Americans work for.. this is only the first step.. there will be more and more power struggles and the government will do its best to get total control of the people.. American is on its last legs.. only a miracle can save us now.. WHy cant we go back to What the founding fathers had set up.. it worked for them.. very very well.. it made us what we are today.. a world power.... i like the idea.. if it aint broke.. dont Freakin fix it..

You don't think the healthcare industry is broke? You think it is working for the American people?

its expensive, nothing more. broke? you have got to be kidding. you get hurt, you go to the hospital, they cant turn you away. its all about money and power. you are about the only person in the world who thinks otherwise

And what if you don't have enough money? or you have a pre-existing condition? or you are a student whose been kicked of your parents insurance? or you accidentally filled in one tiny error on a form 10 years ago so they deny you help when you get sick? or you have healthcare and don't want to pay for all the uninsured who need A&E? or a multitude of other things that the companies do to get as much money whilst providing the smallest amount of healthcare.

LOL haha what the flip are you talking about man.. you have any idea how our health system works?? you dont have to have freakin insurance.. i know many people who dont make more than 100 bucks a month and they go to the doctors.. have surgery .. get prescriptions.. and get therapy.. they aint got no money.. or insurance. but they get taken care of just the same, so what exactly is this Bill gonna change?? Government power.. thats all..think what you will, but, you sir..are comical

[jay_a2j]

When has any government spending program come in at or below budget? When has the government actually cut medicare or medicaid as much as they claim they will?

NEVER.


Awe come on, give us a tougher one.

[jay_a2j]

You don't think the healthcare industry is broke?

I think the US government is broke.

[PLAYER57832]

16,500 new IRS agents. WOO HOO!

Just to clarify, the bulk of the new IRS agents came because the idea of using private contractors to do those jobs FAILED. They offered poorer service and COST MORE. The new employees will save us all money. It has nothing to do with healthcare.

And the IRS WILL continue to grow because more people are in the US. More people means more taxes and more need for tax collectors.

[PLAYER57832]

When has any government spending program come in at or below budget?

Most, in fact. They are required to by law. Of course, they don't make news.. only the big exceptions do.

When has the government actually cut medicare or medicaid as much as they claim they will?

When have the claimed they were going to cut it?

Some individual congressfolks and such have claimed such in campaigns, but the goverment has never made such claims. You might wish they would, but they have not.

[Snorri1234]

LOL haha what the flip are you talking about man.. you have any idea how our health system works??

I think he actually has a better idea than you.

you dont have to have freakin insurance..

You can indeed also pay out of pocket, but that's ridiculously expensive.

i know many people who dont make more than 100 bucks a month and they go to the doctors.. have surgery .. get prescriptions.. and get therapy.. they aint got no money.. or insurance.

If they don't make more than 100 bucks a month they can literally not pay for anything. Like, not even afford food and rent. Bullshit that they can afford a doctor.

[PLAYER57832]

LOL haha what the flip are you talking about man.. you have any idea how our health system works?? you dont have to have freakin insurance.. i know many people who dont make more than 100 bucks a month and they go to the doctors.. have surgery .. get prescriptions.. and get therapy.. they aint got no money.. or insurance. but they get taken care of just the same, so what exactly is this Bill gonna change?? Government power.. thats all..think what you will, but, you sir..are comical

As has been said MANY times, yes, the people without a dime DO get free insurance, which all of us pay for, right now. This bill is NOT ABOUT THE DERELICTS, it is about WORKING people who don't get free care and cannot afford to buy it.

Even many of us who PAY FOR insurance, including very high-deductable policies, cannot afford to use that insurance. (example... my friend, who is SINGLE pays almost $300 a month for his work-based policy with a $35 co-pay for regular doctor visits, $50 for specialists of any kind, $75 for emergency care, None of which counts toward the $1000 per person set of deductables. After that, you still pay 10%, but again, those "so-pays" don't count).

[jay_a2j]

When has any government spending program come in at or below budget?

Most, in fact. They are required to by law. Of course, they don't make news.. only the big exceptions do.

When has the government actually cut medicare or medicaid as much as they claim they will?

When have the claimed they were going to cut it?

Some individual congressfolks and such have claimed such in campaigns, but the goverment has never made such claims. You might wish they would, but they have not.

PLAYER must be smokin the good stuff! Either that or she is accustom to relaying inaccurate information. Seriously, do you "goose step" around your house? I have never met someone as in love with big government as you.

[tdans]

LOL haha what the flip are you talking about man.. you have any idea how our health system works??

I think he actually has a better idea than you.

you dont have to have freakin insurance..

You can indeed also pay out of pocket, but that's ridiculously expensive.

i know many people who dont make more than 100 bucks a month and they go to the doctors.. have surgery .. get prescriptions.. and get therapy.. they aint got no money.. or insurance.

If they don't make more than 100 bucks a month they can literally not pay for anything. Like, not even afford food and rent. Bullshit that they can afford a doctor.

LOl..
1. He doesnt live in the US.. he knows what he hears more than likely. I hear about this stuff all the time.. MY older sis is a nurse and people i know talk about it all the time..
2. you can pay out of your pocket.. but that is expensive.. agreed.. but you can still get medical help without having money or insurance.. alot of hospitals have a 15,000$ limit.. if you cant pay it.. you can go to the financial office and ask for help.. i know my family had 20,000$ bill get cleared.. its a system that works.. everyone i know hasnt had a lack of medical attention.. and i know Alot of people..
3. They dont pay rent cause they work for there landlord.. they aint got electricity..they get food by foodstamps..so yea.. i know lots of poor people.. one person i know just got surgery on her shoulder.. and shes taking steroids to help with the another problem in her body.. and she didnt pay barely a thing.. the system works.. why fix it?? if its not broken?? agreed.. there is problems in certain areas of the US pertaining to medical issues related to certain hospitals.. but there will always be problems.. you cant fix them all.. all this bill did was give the Government more control..

[thegreekdog]

So are you healthcare supporters excited? I'm not getting a lot of excitement from you guys. C'mon, someone has to start a cheer.

[Neoteny]

A watered down bill! Huzzah.

Better than nothing?

[thegreekdog]

A watered down bill! Huzzah.

Better than nothing?

I don't know, the Democrats in Congress seemed pretty excited. You guys aren't?

[Neoteny]

A watered down bill! Huzzah.

Better than nothing?

I don't know, the Democrats in Congress seemed pretty excited. You guys aren't?

I'm happy it got passed. The Dems can claim it as a victory, which I'm sure gives them the warm fuzzies. It's not what I'd hoped it would be, but, like I said, I feel we're better off than before.

[thegreekdog]

A watered down bill! Huzzah.

Better than nothing?

I don't know, the Democrats in Congress seemed pretty excited. You guys aren't?

I'm happy it got passed. The Dems can claim it as a victory, which I'm sure gives them the warm fuzzies. It's not what I'd hoped it would be, but, like I said, I feel we're better off than before.

Got it.

Based on the limited poll data available, I'm not sure the Democrats are going to be banging the healthcare drum, at least those who are going to be in tight races (not the Nancy Pelosis of the world).

I honestly hope it all works out; I just don't think it will.

[Neoteny]

If this site is still around in ten years, I do plan on coming back and laughing at all the paranoids worried about socialism.

[spurgistan]

bv

A watered down bill! Huzzah.

Better than nothing?

I don't know, the Democrats in Congress seemed pretty excited. You guys aren't?

I'm happy it got passed. The Dems can claim it as a victory, which I'm sure gives them the warm fuzzies. It's not what I'd hoped it would be, but, like I said, I feel we're better off than before.

It's not what it could have been, but it is pretty important to remember that this is some of the widest-ranging social legislation we've had in 45 years. Is health care "won," like I heard Pelosi say? Hell no, to quote the angry guy in my avatar (but we know he's just pissed because of the tax on tanning booths). And this is weaker legislation than any other president had offered beforehand. But it's something. And in terms of reform, getting something done where nothing had been done is huge.

[thegreekdog]

So, let me ask youse this one: what does the legislation do differently?

Here is what it does (according to msn.com):

(1) Under the legislation, most Americans would have to have insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty. Some people woudl be exempted from the insurance requirement (financial hardship, religious beliefs, American Indians).

thegreekdog response: Financial hardship? Really? Wasn't that the point of the legislation?

(2) If one cannot afford health insurance, one might be eligible for Medicaid, which will be expanded "sharply" beginning in 2014.

thegreekdog response: I wonder if this part of the plan has been budgeted by the CBO. I suspect the answer is no. However, again, wasn't the point of this bill to insure the people who could not afford health insurance? I mean, that's what all the Democrat talking points have been about.

(3) If one is not eligible for Medicaid, and one cannot afford health insurance, one might be eligible for government subsidies to help pay for private insurance that would be sold in the state-based insurance market placed, slated to begin operation in 2014.

thegreekdog response: 2014? Really? See responses to #1 and #2.

(4) If you have a medical condition, the bill would make it easier for you to get coverage because insurers would be barred from rejecting applicants based on health status once the exchanges are operating in 2014. The bill creates a temporary high-risk insurance pool for people with medical problems who have been rejected by insurers and have been uninsured at least 6 months.

thegreekdog response: Good, this was kind of a point of the whole debate. However, again, has the CBO budgeted this one yet?

(5) Companies with fewer than 50 workers wouldn't face any penalties if they didn't offer insurance. Companies can get tax credits to help buy insurance. Firms with more than 50 employees that do not offer insurance would have to pay a fee of $2000 per full-time employee.

thegreekdog response: I like most of this, except the $2,000 fee. What if that's cheaper than offering insurance to your employees?

(6) Medicare - This year, seniors who enter the Part D coverage gap would get $250 to help pay their medications. Drug company discounts on brand-name drugs and federal subsidies and discounts for all drugs would reduce the gap (indicated previously).

thegreekdog response - Great. $250.

(7) The bill is estimated to cost $940 billion over a decade. Because of higher taxes and fees and billions of dollars in Medicare payment cuts to providers, the bill narrows the budget deficit by $138 billion over 10 years.

thegreekdog response - Great.

(8) Starting in 2013, individuals would pay a higher Medicare payroll tax of 2.35% of earnings of more than $200,000 a year and couples earning more than $250,000 (an increase of 0.9%). In addition, there is an additional 3.8% on unearned income such as dividends and interest over the threshhold.

thegreekdog response - Fine.

(9) Starting in 2018, the bill would impose a 40% excise tax on the portion of most employer-sponsored health coverage that exceeds $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families.

thegreekdog response - Interesting.

There's some other shit in the msn article. Doesn't really matter to me.

My overall response is that this will cost a whole hell of a lot more than we think it does, partly because only 6 years of the plan is "paid for" and partly because I don't think this will change a whole lot of who is insured and who is not. Can anyone find that somewhere? Based on my reading of msn, it doesn't look like a whole lot of people who are currently uninsured will become insured magically as a result of this bill. So, those costs that we currently incur to provide healthcare to those people will still be costs going forward. And then we'll have the Heatlhcare Bill #2... which will be government insurance (the original plan). At least, that's what I think will happen.

[PLAYER57832]

LOL haha what the flip are you talking about man.. you have any idea how our health system works??

I think he actually has a better idea than you.

you dont have to have freakin insurance..

You can indeed also pay out of pocket, but that's ridiculously expensive.

i know many people who dont make more than 100 bucks a month and they go to the doctors.. have surgery .. get prescriptions.. and get therapy.. they aint got no money.. or insurance.

If they don't make more than 100 bucks a month they can literally not pay for anything. Like, not even afford food and rent. Bullshit that they can afford a doctor.

LOl..
1. He doesnt live in the US.. he knows what he hears more than likely. I hear about this stuff all the time.. MY older sis is a nurse and people i know talk about it all the time..

"your sister is a nurse" as opposed to "he just knows what he hears"

and you don't see any inconsistancy there? interesting...

2. you can pay out of your pocket.. but that is expensive.. agreed.. but you can still get medical help without having money or insurance.. alot of hospitals have a 15,000$ limit.. if you cant pay it.. you can go to the financial office and ask for help.. i know my family had 20,000$ bill get cleared.. its a system that works.. everyone i know hasnt had a lack of medical attention.. and i know Alot of people..

I see, and explain how someone making $7-8 an hour is supposed to pay a bill like that?

We almost lost our house becuase of a $4,000 unexpected bill (and a boiler problem to boot) and my husband made about double that.

3. They dont pay rent cause they work for there landlord.. they aint got electricity..they get food by foodstamps..so yea.. i know lots of poor people.. one person i know just got surgery on her shoulder.. and shes taking steroids to help with the another problem in her body.. and she didnt pay barely a thing.. the system works.. why fix it?? if its not broken?? agreed.. there is problems in certain areas of the US pertaining to medical issues related to certain hospitals.. but there will always be problems.. you cant fix them all.. all this bill did was give the Government more control..

Again, this is not about those folks. This is about the rest of us who work, but are not wealthy and don't work for companies with wonderful insurance. THAT is who this bill is about.. or was supposed to be anyway. I have not had time to look through all the changes wrought in the past few days.

[PLAYER57832]

So, let me ask youse this one: what does the legislation do differently?

Here is what it does (according to msn.com):

(1) Under the legislation, most Americans would have to have insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty. Some people woudl be exempted from the insurance requirement (financial hardship, religious beliefs, American Indians).

thegreekdog response: Financial hardship? Really? Wasn't that the point of the legislation?

No, poor people already qualify for Medicaid. I believe their coverage is expanded.

(2) If one cannot afford health insurance, one might be eligible for Medicaid, which will be expanded "sharply" beginning in 2014.

thegreekdog response: I wonder if this part of the plan has been budgeted by the CBO. I suspect the answer is no. However, again, wasn't the point of this bill to insure the people who could not afford health insurance? I mean, that's what all the Democrat talking points have been about.

Actually, the answer to CBO is "yes".. at least as of about 2 weeks ago. I have no idea about more recent changes. Those likely did not go through any such analysis yet.

As for the second part, no. It was not for truly poor people, it was for the working poor, primarily.

(3) If one is not eligible for Medicaid, and one cannot afford health insurance, one might be eligible for government subsidies to help pay for private insurance that would be sold in the state-based insurance market placed, slated to begin operation in 2014.

thegreekdog response: 2014? Really? See responses to #1 and #2.

Its all tied together.

(4) If you have a medical condition, the bill would make it easier for you to get coverage because insurers would be barred from rejecting applicants based on health status once the exchanges are operating in 2014. The bill creates a temporary high-risk insurance pool for people with medical problems who have been rejected by insurers and have been uninsured at least 6 months.

thegreekdog response: Good, this was kind of a point of the whole debate. However, again, has the CBO budgeted this one yet?

Yes, this definitely was. Thought you had read the report?

(5) Companies with fewer than 50 workers wouldn't face any penalties if they didn't offer insurance. Companies can get tax credits to help buy insurance. Firms with more than 50 employees that do not offer insurance would have to pay a fee of $2000 per full-time employee.

thegreekdog response: I like most of this, except the $2,000 fee. What if that's cheaper than offering insurance to your employees?

That is why the fee is $2000. It is supposed to roughly balance out for most people. Where it doesn't, that money is going to help pay for the necessary subsidies for those employees.

(6) Medicare - This year, seniors who enter the Part D coverage gap would get $250 to help pay their medications. Drug company discounts on brand-name drugs and federal subsidies and discounts for all drugs would reduce the gap (indicated previously).

thegreekdog response - Great. $250.

I am not terribly thrilled by this, either.

(7) The bill is estimated to cost $940 billion over a decade. Because of higher taxes and fees and billions of dollars in Medicare payment cuts to providers, the bill narrows the budget deficit by $138 billion over 10 years.

thegreekdog response - Great.

(8) Starting in 2013, individuals would pay a higher Medicare payroll tax of 2.35% of earnings of more than $200,000 a year and couples earning more than $250,000 (an increase of 0.9%). In addition, there is an additional 3.8% on unearned income such as dividends and interest over the threshhold.

thegreekdog response - Fine.

I agree also

(9) Starting in 2018, the bill would impose a 40% excise tax on the portion of most employer-sponsored health coverage that exceeds $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families.

thegreekdog response - Interesting.

Essentially, this was a way for these companies to provide more pay tax-free. But, these policies are often so extensive that they give holders no incentive to reduce their personnal costs at all.

Also, well, money has to come from somewhere. Why should companies get a tax break for offering spa treatments and voluntary plastic surgary?

My overall response is that this will cost a whole hell of a lot more than we think it does, partly because only 6 years of the plan is "paid for" and partly because I don't think this will change a whole lot of who is insured and who is not. Can anyone find that somewhere? Based on my reading of msn, it doesn't look like a whole lot of people who are currently uninsured will become insured magically as a result of this bill. So, those costs that we currently incur to provide healthcare to those people will still be costs going forward. And then we'll have the Heatlhcare Bill #2... which will be government insurance (the original plan). At least, that's what I think will happen.

Time will tell. It is not the bill originally proposed. This one is much more for the insurance companies.

I find it ironic that debates over abortion and other inanities resulted in us getting a bill that makes insurance companies cheer.

[Snorri1234]

1. He doesnt live in the US.. he knows what he hears more than likely. I hear about this stuff all the time.. MY older sis is a nurse and people i know talk about it all the time..

Yes but anecdotal evidence does not make you right.

2. you can pay out of your pocket.. but that is expensive.. agreed.. but you can still get medical help without having money or insurance.. alot of hospitals have a 15,000$ limit.. if you cant pay it.. you can go to the financial office and ask for help.. i know my family had 20,000$ bill get cleared.. its a system that works.. everyone i know hasnt had a lack of medical attention.. and i know Alot of people..

Wait....you think that bills getting unpaid proves your system works?


Do you have the same weird idea as jay has that hospitals and doctors don't try another way to get that money? Like that when you can't pay they simply say "welp, guess we're going to lose all that money now"?

[thegreekdog]

My anger towards this bill has the following components: (1) It doesn't do what everyone says it does, and does virtually nothing until 2014 (when President Obama will be finishing up his second term by the way), and (2) It costs $940 billion, is paid for by tax increases and cuts which do not add up to $940 billion, yet decreases the budget deficit by $138 billion.

So, my concern is that it doesn't do what it needs to do (whether you're liberal or not) and it costs way too much for what it actually does. You know why? Because we had to do it as fast as possible.

[Snorri1234]

My overall response is that this will cost a whole hell of a lot more than we think it does, partly because only 6 years of the plan is "paid for" and partly because I don't think this will change a whole lot of who is insured and who is not. Can anyone find that somewhere? Based on my reading of msn, it doesn't look like a whole lot of people who are currently uninsured will become insured magically as a result of this bill. So, those costs that we currently incur to provide healthcare to those people will still be costs going forward. And then we'll have the Heatlhcare Bill #2... which will be government insurance (the original plan). At least, that's what I think will happen.

I figured it actually looks like those who are currently unisured will become insured. The uninsured are those who can't really pay (yet aren't completely poor) those who can't get insurance because of pre-existing conditions and those who simply choose not to have insurance.

I dunno, who else isn't insured?

[rockfist]

Its just flat morally wrong to mandate that people pay for things for others. I owe a duty to my family and to some extent friends and extended family. By mandating that I pay for people outside of those groups you weaken my ability to take care of people within those groups and that is morally wrong whether the majority of people in our country support it or not, and in the case of this bill they do not.

I'm not opposed to giving money to aid others, but it should be discretionary not mandated by the government throught the threat of force. I give money every year for scholarships and other worthy causes. If the government started mandating that I do that I would resent the hell out of it.

I just don't understand how anyone can get it into their head that its ok to take from others through force. I wasn't raised that way and I will not raise my children that way. When my older daughter takes something from my younger daughter through force we make her give it back.

[Snorri1234]

Its just flat morally wrong to mandate that people pay for things for others.

Hey, guess what! Nobody gives a shit about your retarded moral viewpoint!

[PLAYER57832]

Its just flat morally wrong to mandate that people pay for things for others. I owe a duty to my family and to some extent friends and extended family. By mandating that I pay for people outside of those groups you weaken my ability to take care of people within those groups and that is morally wrong whether the majority of people in our country support it or not, and in the case of this bill they do not.

I'm not opposed to giving money to aid others, but it should be discretionary not mandated by the government throught the threat of force. I give money every year for scholarships and other worthy causes. If the government started mandating that I do that I would resent the hell out of it.

I just don't understand how anyone can get it into their head that its ok to take from others through force. I wasn't raised that way and I will not raise my children that way. When my older daughter takes something from my younger daughter through force we make her give it back.

Well, then you should like this bill, because a big goal is ensuring that less of your money goes to paying for the uninsured.

or, didn't you realize that they are a big part of why our healthcare costs are so high?