Obamacare Stands/Insurance Mandate, er, Tax Upheld

I read that millions of younger insured (20-somethings) who don't normally get health insurance because they're generally healthy will help bring down the overall costs. They'll be paying in like everyone else, but taking not very much out. That segment was not in the system previously.

Entitlement Whore wrote:

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?

I will try to type real slow so maybe it will be easier to comprehend. Insurance companies pool the premiums collected from their customers and use that pool to pay claims, so of course your premiums will be used to pay health care for other people. That is the nature of insurance. Likewise, health care under VA and Medicaid/Medicare are paid with tax dollars, so of course your tax dollars, assuming you pay taxes, will go to pay for health care for others.

Raees wrote: I read that millions of younger insured (20-somethings) who don't normally get health insurance because they're generally healthy will help bring down the overall costs. They'll be paying in like everyone else, but taking not very much out. That segment was not in the system previously.

Oh, are you talking about the same young people who are struggling to make ends meet as they buckle under the weight of student loans with the substandard wages they are making because they are either unemployed or underemployed? Those young people?

The ones whose credit ratings are getting trashed by all the debt in their young lives?

I can't think of a better group of people to be "picking up the tab" then young people and young families struggling to survive in this economy of "hope and change".

PrintSmith wrote:

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.

Of course with more paying into the insurance company, more will be available. It is just that now those who were freeloading will be required to pay into the pool and not get away with their freeloading as they have previously. They were being subsidized, now they are not. Why are you so against requiring that the freeloaders pay their fair share if they are able?

Something the Dog Said wrote: You seem to be the only poster opposed to the ACA that is remotely articulate about it.

Your insults are not going to deflect from the debate. You've been asked a number of questions on this thread... do you care to answer them or just continue with the "reading comprehension" and "articulate" diversions? Because at this point, there may be some wonder on who really understands the ramifications of the ACA.

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

Thanks for proving my opinion about the inability of conservatives to provide an articulate and thoughtful comment to the issues at hand.

Something the Dog Said wrote: I will try to type real slow so maybe it will be easier to comprehend. Insurance companies pool the premiums collected from their customers and use that pool to pay claims, so of course your premiums will be used to pay health care for other people. That is the nature of insurance. Likewise, health care under VA and Medicaid/Medicare are paid with tax dollars, so of course your tax dollars, assuming you pay taxes, will go to pay for health care for others.

You fail to mention the federal subsidies that will pay up to about 95% of the insurance premiums for those with incomes in the range of approx 133% to 400% of the federal poverty level.

According to the CBO, in 2016 that will mean single people making less than $50K will get subsidies while families of four making under $102K will get subsidies.

These subsidies will be paid in the form of refundable tax credits. So even people who owe zero income tax would receive a full credit.

So who pays for these tax credits? Hint...it sure isn't the insurance companies.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-premiums.pdf

Entitlement Whore wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: You seem to be the only poster opposed to the ACA that is remotely articulate about it.

Your insults are not going to deflect from the debate. You've been asked a number of questions on this thread... do you care to answer them or just continue with the "reading comprehension" and "articulate" diversions? Because at this point, there may be some wonder on who really understands the ramifications of the ACA.

Speaking of diversions. I have answered the question that you posed to me. I will try to find some links on the ACA (hoopefully with pictures and large print) that may be helpful to you. (Sorry, I could not resist).

Something the Dog Said wrote: Of course with more paying into the insurance company, more will be available. It is just that now those who were freeloading will be required to pay into the pool and not get away with their freeloading as they have previously. They were being subsidized, now they are not. Why are you so against requiring that the freeloaders pay their fair share if they are able?

Since you are so articulate and your reading comprehension is way beyond the skills of the other posters on this thread, can you help us poor rubes and point us to the pages of the ACA bill that back up your statements?

pineinthegrass wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: I will try to type real slow so maybe it will be easier to comprehend. Insurance companies pool the premiums collected from their customers and use that pool to pay claims, so of course your premiums will be used to pay health care for other people. That is the nature of insurance. Likewise, health care under VA and Medicaid/Medicare are paid with tax dollars, so of course your tax dollars, assuming you pay taxes, will go to pay for health care for others.

You fail to mention the federal subsidies that will pay up to about 95% of the insurance premiums for those with incomes in the range of approx 133% to 400% of the federal poverty level.

According to the CBO, in 2016 that will mean single people making less than $50K will get subsidies while families of four making under $102K will get subsidies.

These subsidies will be paid in the form of refundable tax credits. So even people who owe zero income tax would receive a full credit.

So who pays for these tax credits? Hint...it sure isn't the insurance companies.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-premiums.pdf

Dog is failing to mention a lot of things, like actual figures and references to the ACA bill. Maybe Dog is frantically looking over his lefty talking points websites to get the clip and paste he needs.