Obamacare Stands/Insurance Mandate, er, Tax Upheld

Something the Dog Said wrote: No one is asking you to pay for their insurance, only that you have it yourself.

That is a joke, right? Of course the federal government is going to be asking you to pay for the insurance of others via your tax dollars - where else will the money to subsidize those unable to afford the insurance they are required to carry or face being taxed come from if not from you, me and every other taxpayer?

FredHayek wrote: Got me there, I don't know anyone who has read and digested those 2700 pages.

I read the 1300 page version of the bill, but it changed and changed so fast, and page after page got added and/or modified that I'm not sure how many citizens were able to read it and comment on it before it passed. And I know this much, there are many sections of the bill that has nothing directly to do with health insurance. Have you ever heard of the "Health Workforce Provisions?" It's a publicly funded workforce of clinics, health care workers, training and schools. It's an expansion of a currently (well... currently as of 2008) narrow program of helping put health care workers into rural, urban and tribal areas that are practically devoid of any health care services.

This expansion will now find the program integrated into almost every community clinic, hospitals, doctors offices, schools... basically a federal health workforce agency, with persons funded and trained by the rules and regulations of the federal program. Some of the initial funding has already started and the whole workforce programs gathers steam in 2014. Yep... that's in the bill. You can't know what's in there until we pass it.

Here's a summary of the provisions...

http://www.ncsl.org/documents/health/Hl ... HR3590.pdf

If you don't think these folks already had tricks built into the ACA bill that would move us to a totally federally run health care system, without the insurance companies... I have a amusement park to sell you for pennies.

Entitlement Whore wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote: Lady Jazzer is finally saying stuff that makes sense. Pretty much everyone I know who is in favor of Obamacare fits into two catagories-

(1) They expect somthing for nothing- they think they will wind up ahead because someone else will be paying their expenses. Basically these are your typical freeloader looter types. These are the people who either can't pull their own weight to pay for their own medical expenses or health insurance- or are just too lazy to do it because it's easier to let people who actually work for a living pay for it.

OR
(2) They have some personal experience with a health care expense that either they or a family member could not afford- so they advocate for a socialized system to get society to pay for it. My son had cancer- or my husband had a heart attack. They recieved care worth thousands of dollars- accepted the care but not the responsibility of paying for it.

And they have no problem expecting me to pay for it.

This is what we have become here in the USSA- no longer do we take personal responsibility for our own expenses- we now look to the government to take care of us- a task that they are all too happy to take on, but completely unqualified to deliver. They will screw it up big time.

Sorry if that sounds harsh- but it's the real truth, and someone has to say it. I read through the thread on healcare on that other site this morning too- every person for this law has some personal sad sob story about why they support it.

No sad stories about those of us who have to pay for it.

The only individuals that I know who oppose ACA are those who have never bothered to read it and have no understanding of how it actually will work. No one is asking you to pay for their insurance, only that you have it yourself.

Who pays for the catastrophic preexisting condition patients that need rather expensive care? And who pays for those people who can't have it for themselves?

The insurance companies will pay for it, that is the whole point. As opposed to the current system, where those unfortunates without insurance would declare bankruptcy, and shift their costs onto those who can pay or have insurance.

Something the Dog Said wrote: The only individuals that I know who oppose ACA are those who have never bothered to read it and have no understanding of how it actually will work.

Something the Dog Said wrote: ..... it is only a modest amount, no more than .025 of an individuals taxable income beginning at a max of $95 in 2014 and capping at $645 or so by 2016.

... and small business owners will be given substantial tax credits towards employee health insurance.

Maybe Dog needs to read the bill again. No it is not a max of $95 or capped at $645. It is the larger of those numbers or 2.5%

And the small business owners "substantial" tax credits are temporary and full of bureaucratic hurdles, and end in 2016 after they dump the employees on to the exchange.

By the way... for those who have been complaining about my reading comprehension, a little note. I have been in and out of the health care industry for about 15 years. I have programmed hospital systems, third party support applications and I am currently working for a consulting firm that deals with medical billing. I am not oblivious to how the federal governments laws (current laws and past laws) effect the health care industry.

Eighty percent of my programming time is spent analyzing rules and regulations so I can make sure the code I am writing will produce compliant results. And these regulations can change in midstream, sometimes 4 times a year, and then the health care business has to keep playing catch up. And these overwhelming regulations hinder doctors, medical billing, labs, nurses, support personal and the software that's managing the whole show.

I don't have a problem with reading comprehension. But that's a nice term to toss out in an attempt to shut down debate.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

Entitlement Whore wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote: Lady Jazzer is finally saying stuff that makes sense. Pretty much everyone I know who is in favor of Obamacare fits into two catagories-

(1) They expect somthing for nothing- they think they will wind up ahead because someone else will be paying their expenses. Basically these are your typical freeloader looter types. These are the people who either can't pull their own weight to pay for their own medical expenses or health insurance- or are just too lazy to do it because it's easier to let people who actually work for a living pay for it.

OR
(2) They have some personal experience with a health care expense that either they or a family member could not afford- so they advocate for a socialized system to get society to pay for it. My son had cancer- or my husband had a heart attack. They recieved care worth thousands of dollars- accepted the care but not the responsibility of paying for it.

And they have no problem expecting me to pay for it.

This is what we have become here in the USSA- no longer do we take personal responsibility for our own expenses- we now look to the government to take care of us- a task that they are all too happy to take on, but completely unqualified to deliver. They will screw it up big time.

Sorry if that sounds harsh- but it's the real truth, and someone has to say it. I read through the thread on healcare on that other site this morning too- every person for this law has some personal sad sob story about why they support it.

No sad stories about those of us who have to pay for it.

The only individuals that I know who oppose ACA are those who have never bothered to read it and have no understanding of how it actually will work. No one is asking you to pay for their insurance, only that you have it yourself.

Who pays for the catastrophic preexisting condition patients that need rather expensive care? And who pays for those people who can't have it for themselves?

The insurance companies will pay for it, that is the whole point. As opposed to the current system, where those unfortunates without insurance would declare bankruptcy, and shift their costs onto those who can pay or have insurance.

So... after 2014, none of my payments to the insurance company, and none of my tax dollars will go to subsidizing health care for any other person?

LOL wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: The only individuals that I know who oppose ACA are those who have never bothered to read it and have no understanding of how it actually will work.

Something the Dog Said wrote: ..... it is only a modest amount, no more than .025 of an individuals taxable income beginning at a max of $95 in 2014 and capping at $645 or so by 2016.

... and small business owners will be given substantial tax credits towards employee health insurance.

Maybe Dog needs to read the bill again. No it is not a max of $95 or capped at $645. It is the larger of those numbers or 2.5%

And the small business owners "substantial" tax credits are temporary and full of bureaucratic hurdles, and end in 2016 after they dump the employees on to the exchange.

Are you saying that Dog has a problem with reading comprehension? No... can't be.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

Entitlement Whore wrote: Who pays for the catastrophic preexisting condition patients that need rather expensive care? And who pays for those people who can't have it for themselves?

The insurance companies will pay for it, that is the whole point. As opposed to the current system, where those unfortunates without insurance would declare bankruptcy, and shift their costs onto those who can pay or have insurance.

And just where do you think the money the insurance company uses to pay the bill comes from Dog? They, like the federal government, get all of their money from the people themselves, right? Where are the insurance companies going to get the extra dollars to cover the costs of the people who formerly paid out of pocket or freeloaded off of the system? From the very same place that the providers got it prior to the federal government requiring everyone to purchase insurance or be taxed, right? The tax money that is going to subsidize the cost of the insurance for those who can't afford to purchase it comes out of the taxpayers pocket, same as the costs did before. The amount of health care purchased is going to go up, not down, when millions upon millions of people who are paying little or nothing for their insurance and little or nothing for their care are added into the existing system. All of that additional money, plus, less we forget, profit for the private insurance company, is going to be coming out of the pockets of people who have insurance or the ability to pay for their care out of pocket, just like it did before ACA.

Dog speaks out the back end, but as a usual lib NEVER reads just takes for granted the gov. will take care of them.

LOL wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: The only individuals that I know who oppose ACA are those who have never bothered to read it and have no understanding of how it actually will work.

Something the Dog Said wrote: ..... it is only a modest amount, no more than .025 of an individuals taxable income beginning at a max of $95 in 2014 and capping at $645 or so by 2016.

... and small business owners will be given substantial tax credits towards employee health insurance.

Maybe Dog needs to read the bill again. No it is not a max of $95 or capped at $645. It is the larger of those numbers or 2.5%

And the small business owners "substantial" tax credits are temporary and full of bureaucratic hurdles, and end in 2016 after they dump the employees on to the exchange.

My bad, I transposed the cap amount. You seem to be the only poster opposed to the ACA that is remotely articulate about it.