If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Is Obamacare about to raise taxes on the middle class by $1 TRILLION? Well, is it?   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 316
    More: Stupid, obamacare, middle class, income taxes, Debbie Wasserman Schultz  
•       •       •

16758 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Mar 2013 at 11:11 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



316 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-12 01:32:01 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Because you live in a society.


Society is in the shiatter.
 
2013-03-12 01:32:56 PM
Every lie is precious.

Not to worry folks. "Obamacare" is mostly just political posturing. The ACA was written in such a way as to allow key provisions of it to be easily repealed with amendments to other legislation. It also has a lot of pork in it, which is the reason the Repubs went along with a bill that was written largely by the insurance lobby.
 
2013-03-12 01:34:50 PM

karnal: IRQ12: By the way this is not "Obamacare".

It is "Corporatecare" brought to you by Obama and friends.

Calling Obamacare Corporatecare is like calling ACORN Community Organizations International or like calling a Socialist a Democrat


Naw, it's like calling The "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act " a boon to health insurance companies.

Or comparing advocates for it who aren't direct beneficiaries chickens voting for colonel sanders.
 
2013-03-12 01:35:47 PM

JohnBigBootay: Great Janitor: You do realize that by law, all money taken in by health insurance companies, no less than 65% of that money must be paid on claims. That means that health insurance companies must pay all employees, including salesmen, secretaries, all the utility bills, marketing, other costs of running a company out of 35% of the money taken in each month. So, your money isn't being wasted on brokers and salesmen. Your money, if it's not going to the well being of your employees, is going to the well being of others who are insured through the same people insuring your employees

And that borders on criminal. It should be much higher than that. For instance we use one of the blues, which is technically a non-profit. 35% to overhead and administration would barely qualify as a shiatty charity. Paying 5% of health care premiums to a salesman is archaic and wasteful to say the least. I do not need a farking salesman to choose an insurance policy any more than I need a salesman to choose a car or book an airline ticket. I spend almost three hundred grand a year on health insurance. The fact that the first $14k off the top of that goes into a salesman's pocket before paying for any health costs is absurd on its face.


You do need a salesman to walk you through your insurance sell to show you exactly what you're getting.  I've taken several classes over the past 12 months on insurance policies offered by my company, and several parts of those classes were rather confusing.  You need someone knowledgeable.  You can't test drive a policy like you can a car.  When I sell a policy I make crystal clear what the policy covers, what it won't, how to get it to cover what it's not covering (most policies have exclusions, conditions where the policy will never pay, like getting hurt while committing a felony for example), plus part of my job as salesman is to be the person to call when you have questions about your policy, instead of some call center in India.

And when I say that no less than 65% of all money received must be paid out in claims, it's actually a lot higher.  AFLAC, for example, pays over 80% in claims.
 
2013-03-12 01:37:05 PM

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: tylerdurden217: How about a a single non-profit payer system that covers basic healthcare for everyone in the US?

Why hello there, tovarisch fellow traveler!


Whenever I think of a command economy of some failed state, I remember how it all began with universal health care. Then some other things happened and before you knew it an oppressive totalitarian dictatorship was sending ruling and the once free citizens were left wondering, "How did this all happen?"
 
2013-03-12 01:42:03 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: kendelrio: You didn't answer my question. Why should I pay for someone elses healthcare?

Because you live in a society.  Either suck it up and help out your neighbors, or take your whiney ass to the woods.


Seriously.  The day the government asks me if I want my taxes to be used to make bombs to kill brown poors is the day I give a fark about where the teatards want their money to go.
 
2013-03-12 01:45:39 PM

Smidge204: This appears to be one of those cases where "Middle Class" is a euphemism for "People just scraping by on $200K+/year"

Also, FTA:

Moreover, most calculations show that middle-income Americans are expected to get more in tax relief , such as health-care subsidies, than in additional tax hikes. CBO, for instance, indicates that middle-income Americans would receive about $1 trillion in premium credits in this 10-year period. So on a net basis, most middle-class Americans should expect to come out ahead.


=Smidge=


I think they need to clarify. Real middle class people will not get subsidies. Middle class is not 40k a year any more, not even close. Not even 80k per family should be considered middle class.

Obamacare is nothing but a gigantic hit on the economy, and a boon to the insurance companies, the IRS, and the government.
 
2013-03-12 01:45:40 PM

digitalrain: festoon: Best advice when you're trying to wade through all the complex political crap: If a Republican  politician says it, its a lie.

FTFY. Do you seriously think the Democrats lie any less than the Republicans?


CheesyMonkey beat you to it with this particular bit of RW stupidity. It's not the quantity of of the lies that really matter, but the quality. A lie from Democrat might make you sad or feel slightly uncomfortable. A lie from a Republican will kill you or leave you destitute.

And the Tea Baggers would be all gung-ho to join in on the killing.
 
2013-03-12 01:46:07 PM
does anyone find the photo in the article bizarre?  that person with the shirt off seems very oddly shaped - where is that person's chest and arms and why is their back indented like that?
 
2013-03-12 01:49:47 PM

JohnBigBootay: Great Janitor: You do realize that by law, all money taken in by health insurance companies, no less than 65% of that money must be paid on claims. That means that health insurance companies must pay all employees, including salesmen, secretaries, all the utility bills, marketing, other costs of running a company out of 35% of the money taken in each month. So, your money isn't being wasted on brokers and salesmen. Your money, if it's not going to the well being of your employees, is going to the well being of others who are insured through the same people insuring your employees

And that borders on criminal. It should be much higher than that. For instance we use one of the blues, which is technically a non-profit. 35% to overhead and administration would barely qualify as a shiatty charity. Paying 5% of health care premiums to a salesman is archaic and wasteful to say the least. I do not need a farking salesman to choose an insurance policy any more than I need a salesman to choose a car or book an airline ticket. I spend almost three hundred grand a year on health insurance. The fact that the first $14k off the top of that goes into a salesman's pocket before paying for any health costs is absurd on its face.


Check the facts on your Blue plan. BCBS of AL is above 95% to claims. Yours is likely close.
 
2013-03-12 01:50:43 PM

Great Janitor: Mandatory health insurance is a waste of money for me, just pay the annual fine. Now, let's say I broke my leg falling down the stairs. All I have to do is buy insurance, which would take effect instantly, get fixed up, and as soon as the leg was healed, cancel the insurance. And with no one being rejected for insurance, they can't legally stop me from buying insurance knowing that I was only going to cancel it the moment the cast came off.


If you are in some type of accident that renders you unconscious before the ambulance gets you to the hospital how are you going to get insured before you rack up tens of thousands in bills?
 
2013-03-12 01:50:47 PM
Probably, but only if you accept the Supreme Court judgement that the fines involved with NOT having health insurance constitutes a "tax".
 
2013-03-12 01:54:06 PM
Thus, within the 2013 to 2022 budget period, there seems little debate that the health-care law has about $1 trillion in taxes. The House Ways & Means Committee released a calculation earlier this month and there are few questions about its math. Alternatively, the Congressional Budget Office last year released an analysis showing that repeal of the law would cut revenues by exactly $1 trillion.
"I think the $1 trillion figure is fair," said Paul Van de Water of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The biggest tax increases in the law stem from an additional 0.9 percent payroll tax and a new 3.8 percent tax on investment income - but those are aimed at couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000. That accounts for almost a third - $318 billion - of the $1 trillion total between 2013 and 2022.


So Obamacare adds $1T of new taxes over ten years, with only a third of that hitting couples making over $250,000 or individuals making over $200,000.  Seems like a lot in additional taxes.
 
2013-03-12 01:54:38 PM
As the article states, both Johnson and Wasserman-Schulz were both right and wrong.

Just like politics and our elected officials.

What?
 
2013-03-12 01:55:36 PM
My reaction to this thread:
 
2013-03-12 01:55:39 PM

Queensowntalia: Obamacare drank the last of the milk and didn't replace it. It's so inconsiderate.



Obama comes to your house and leaves just three sheets of toilet paper on the roll so he doesn't have to replace it!

/ Thanks Obama
 
2013-03-12 01:55:41 PM
I think the question here really is "should everyone have access to healthcare?" If a person starts abusing drugs at age 15 drops out of high school is under or not employed do they really deserve access to healthcare? This bill is basically a huge expansion to Medicaid as most people that are not insured now will have to join Medicaid. Don't confuse Medicaid with Medicare which is not being expanded and is a program working adults paid into to take advantage of when they retire. There is nothing in this law that is of any benefit to people who already pay health insurance only punishment in the form of higher taxes, insurance premiums and healthcare costs. It is a bad law but most people can't get past their emotional objections to see that not everyone is equal or entitled to the same treatment. No one can produce any scenario where a person through no fault of their own finds themselves in a situation where the taxpayers need to subsidize their continued livelihood. It is like taking water (money) out of the bucket (economy) and pouring it into a rusty bucket full of holes (welfare programs) as those holes get bigger (offspring) more and more water is just going to drain out (most of the money is spent on disposable goods) at some point you are going to run out of water in the economy bucket.
 
2013-03-12 01:57:23 PM

kendelrio: MattStafford: kendelrio: It's bullshiat. I pay for my families healthcare and it takes a huge chunk of my check. So now my check has to be taxed more to pay for someone else's health care? Bullshiat.

If I'm paying for your healthcare, I should get something for it. Come mow my grass.

We're a wealthy country.  We should be able to take care of our own.  Also, instituting a GMI and allowing the free market to work for the majority of health care issues will dramatically drive down prices.

You didn't answer my question. Why should I pay for someone elses healthcare? There is no benefit to me. Why should I bust my ass to provide for my family only to have more of my wages taken to pay for someone else's benefits?

Also, at what age is a person a farking adult? Kids mandated to stay on my insurance until they're 26? That's bullshiat too. If a "kid" can go to PMITA prison for life at 18, join the military at 18, get married at 18 drink a beer or other things legally, why should I have to foot their insurance bill? So now I'm paying for MY families insurance, some farker who can't afford their insurance AND their crotchfruits insurance until they're 26? fark that!


The "screw you, I got mine!" Mentality in action here folx...
 
2013-03-12 01:57:26 PM

Great Janitor: You do need a salesman to walk you through your insurance sell to show you exactly what you're getting.


No, I do not.

You need someone knowledgeable.

One would assume companies who are providing a product would be staffed by people knowledgeable about that product. That need not be a commissioned salesperson - particularly when the entities he is representing are non-profits.

You can't test drive a policy like you can a car.

I don't need to. What I need to know is the premium, deductible, network, max out of pocket, etc. It's not brain surgery.

When I sell a policy I make crystal clear what the policy covers, what it won't, how to get it to cover what it's not covering (most policies have exclusions, conditions where the policy will never pay, like getting hurt while committing a felony for example), plus part of my job as salesman is to be the person to call when you have questions about your policy, instead of some call center in India.

You tell people the rules and provisions concerning what they are purchasing? How generous. There's a number on the back of the insurance card with a number on it. My insurance salesman does not answer that number when I call it. Nor does he do my COBRA administration. He doesn't even handle terminations or cancellations - I do that all online.

And when I say that no less than 65% of all money received must be paid out in claims, it's actually a lot higher. AFLAC, for example, pays over 80% in claims.

And there goes any credibility you might have had. AFLAC is one of the magic words around here and their salespeople aren't allowed in the building. If you sell that shiat you ought to be ashamed.
 
2013-03-12 01:57:34 PM
I am employed by a company that manufactures and sells medical devices.  Headcount is an issue now that there is a significant tax liability increase in play (that's business-speak for 'beyotches be gettin' fired 'roun heah!' for you Obamabots that can't/won't/will never have a real job).  My daughter, an independent full time college student, can't get full employment because her targeted employers are all cutting hours due to Obamacare.  And I really get a kick out of those who condemn the R's for wanting to repeal it without fully researching it, after Pelosi said we had to pass it to find out what was in it (she really did say that, there's video on the innerwebs and everything).  I've spoken to real, live citizens of countries that have socialised health care, and they all say the same thing: It costs a lot of money.  So, if you're a fan of socialism it's good.  If you're a fan of capitalism, free markets, and freedom of choice, not so much.
 
2013-03-12 01:57:42 PM
Technically speaking these tax increases will hit 'middle class' because they are not pegged to inflation. However by the time someone making roughly 60k now hits 250k plus it will be well beyond 2020 and maybe even 2030.

And really by then it won't matter, the earth will be destroyed by an asteroid wiping out all humanity.

So for now and until then

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
 
2013-03-12 01:57:55 PM

Citrate1007: Yay! Republican math thread.


spinnyliberal.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-12 01:58:01 PM
Obamacare is likely to cost $800 B, and the costs will be paid by people who can't pass along the extra expenses.

No such thing as a free lunch.
 
2013-03-12 01:58:21 PM
For me it is at the point now, where the more they talk about this program and how it'll do X/Y/Z bad things, the more I want the program to succeed. They louder they yell, the more I ignore them.
 
2013-03-12 01:59:05 PM
It is interesting to have a memory that goes back farther than 2007.  I remember when every law and tax passed by a Democratic congress was Bush's fault.  Now, nothing is Obama's fault because half of Congress is Republican.
 
2013-03-12 02:00:14 PM

mycatisposter: Check the facts on your Blue plan. BCBS of AL is above 95% to claims. Yours is likely close.


One would hope so. Because 65% would be criminal. As for the 5% to the broker selling the policy, that's indisputable. I get a letter each year disclosing it.
 
2013-03-12 02:01:36 PM
Interesting pic in the article..looks more like a chinatown massage parlor than a hospital
 
2013-03-12 02:01:44 PM
Buck Ofama
 
2013-03-12 02:02:24 PM

jst3p: Great Janitor: Mandatory health insurance is a waste of money for me, just pay the annual fine. Now, let's say I broke my leg falling down the stairs. All I have to do is buy insurance, which would take effect instantly, get fixed up, and as soon as the leg was healed, cancel the insurance. And with no one being rejected for insurance, they can't legally stop me from buying insurance knowing that I was only going to cancel it the moment the cast came off.

If you are in some type of accident that renders you unconscious before the ambulance gets you to the hospital how are you going to get insured before you rack up tens of thousands in bills?


Much like today, the bill goes unpaid to a debt collector and I spend the next few years ignoring those calls.

Want to really do some good for healthcare reform?  We take in over $3 trillion annually in taxes on the Federal level.  The vast majority of that spending is military.  Pull out of these wars in other countries that we are in, cut back on the military spending (not end it all, just cut back) and put that money into a basic level of healthcare for all Americans without raising taxes.
 
2013-03-12 02:04:29 PM

give me doughnuts: vernonFL: [encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 200x200]

If Obama raises my taxes any more, I'm moving to Belize.


Is this sarcasm? Sometimes it's hard to tell.


If you can afford it, what the Fark are you still doing here?
 
2013-03-12 02:07:36 PM
If found this article interesting because it gave me an idea how much I have to discount Republican statements on alleged Democratic tax increases. The answer is 66% with a possibility of an additional 34%.
 
2013-03-12 02:09:52 PM

olddinosaur: Obamacare is likely to cost $800 B, and the costs will be paid by people who can't pass along the extra expenses.

No such thing as a free lunch.


Cool - Old Dinosaur. Hey, tell us the one about how we should be paying cash for our house.
 
2013-03-12 02:12:26 PM

JohnBigBootay: What's funny is that some people think that 65% of insurance premiums going to pay medical costs is somehow a good number. I build freakin' houses. If you give me $100 you can bet your sweet ass that AT LEAST $85 went to pay the labor materials and subs to build that house and it's quite often more than that. Then I pay all my overhead and STILL turn a profit with the $15 left over.


You're not comparing apples to apples.  The 65% mentioned doesn't cover ANY of the labor of the insurance company, but you're including your own labor.  Take out your labor costs and see if you can still hit 65%.

And by the way, that 65% figure is a mandated minimum, not the desired target.  I've worked for two of the largest insurers in the country, and they were constantly trying to get their own labor and admin costs down as low as they could possibly go.  And then some more.  Their ideal for claim costs was 90%, even though they knew they could never reach it.  Dumping the brokers would have given them a free 13-18%!  It's just too bad that, in many states, insurers are required to use brokers, because of the brokers' lobby.
 
2013-03-12 02:13:45 PM

I_C_Weener: Well...if you squint a little...then the answer is sorta.  It is taxing the provider of "luxury" plans.  Which is being passed on to the end user in high premiums.  And it is raising taxes in lots of other areas...some related...like medical devices (not that every Middle Class person has them).

But, it might be safer to say, "Is this Obamacare costing some people more than before?"  And the answer is yes.  And it is making it more affordable for some to have health insurance.  But it really isn't lowering healthcare costs at all.

Where is my public option?!!!!  Let the government compete with private insurance with a subsidized plan or plans based on income and then you might see a reduction in costs of health insurance.  But I'm not sure how exactly you can lower the costs of healthcare in the 21st century.  The costs of new drugs is astronomical and there is no guarantee of a return, and even when you do get it patented and the right to distribute your drug it may take up to 20 years to recover the years of research and production involved in creating the drug.  Same with devices.   You might be able to cut into care costs like hospitalization, wages for medical staff, and stupid over priced stuff like $10 aspirin.  But a lot of medical care is expensive.  Otherwise, we'd all have an MRI machine in our basements.


Medical care is expensive because the act doesn't address tort reform...period.

Doctors pay ridiculously high malpractice premiums because judges and juries award ridiculous damage awards and it costs a litigant nothing to bring a lawsuit because for even borderline ludicrous claims, its more cost effective to settle rather than defend and go to trial.  What this does is force doctors to practice defensive medicine, ordering every single test they can think of so they can't be adjudged to be negligent later on.

Remove much of the lawsuit incentive, reform malpractice laws to discourage lawsuits in the first place while retaining access to the courts for egregious cases and you deflate a major driver of what drives costs through the roof.  The U.S. spends the highest, by far, per capita on healthcare and are no healthier than the rest of the world and unhealthier than many.  One of the differences in the costs is our civil court system.  It's nice to have most of the time...but this ain't one of them.

And it won't be meaningfully addressed because we elect lawyers to Congress way more than any other occupational group.
 
2013-03-12 02:15:46 PM

Great Janitor: jst3p: Great Janitor: Mandatory health insurance is a waste of money for me, just pay the annual fine. Now, let's say I broke my leg falling down the stairs. All I have to do is buy insurance, which would take effect instantly, get fixed up, and as soon as the leg was healed, cancel the insurance. And with no one being rejected for insurance, they can't legally stop me from buying insurance knowing that I was only going to cancel it the moment the cast came off.

If you are in some type of accident that renders you unconscious before the ambulance gets you to the hospital how are you going to get insured before you rack up tens of thousands in bills?

Much like today, the bill goes unpaid to a debt collector and I spend the next few years ignoring those calls.

Want to really do some good for healthcare reform?  We take in over $3 trillion annually in taxes on the Federal level.  The vast majority of that spending is military.  Pull out of these wars in other countries that we are in, cut back on the military spending (not end it all, just cut back) and put that money into a basic level of healthcare for all Americans without raising taxes.


To cover 100% of Americans, Medicare for everyone. If you want fancier care, you get supplemental insurance, which would still be private and would still have a disgusting profit margin. Basic healthcare should be universal, non-profit and run by just marginally increasing HHS.
 
2013-03-12 02:15:47 PM

craig328: Medical care is expensive because the act doesn't address tort reform...period.


Not correct.
 
2013-03-12 02:15:52 PM

craig328: What this does is force doctors to practice defensive medicine, ordering every single test they can think of so they can't be adjudged to be negligent later on.


Yes because in no way to doctors make more money for every test they order

www.reactionface.info
 
2013-03-12 02:16:22 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: UberDave: You're getting a 3.8% tax increase for just buying a home people!!

Bullschitt.  That tax applies (a) to the capital gains when you *sell*, and (b) only if you can't exempt the capital gains from the regular capital gains tax.


Fix your sarcasm detector.
 
2013-03-12 02:16:44 PM

olddinosaur: Obamacare is likely to cost $800 B, and the costs will be paid by people who can't pass along the extra expenses.

No such thing as a free lunch.


Exactly.  You can't give everyone in your country access to health care without paying for it.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't or can't give everyone access to health care in our country, but might as well be honest that it is going to cost money
 
2013-03-12 02:19:36 PM
I think they need to clarify. Real middle class people will not get subsidies. Middle class is not 40k a year any more, not even close. Not even 80k per family should be considered middle class.


$80K a year is not considered middle class? Can you please tell us what you consider middle class?

/F'ing entitlement!
 
2013-03-12 02:20:05 PM

JohnBigBootay: Great Janitor: You do need a salesman to walk you through your insurance sell to show you exactly what you're getting.

No, I do not.


Interesting, you're the only person to ever say that.  Either you are an expert when it comes to insurance, or a fool.

You need someone knowledgeable.

One would assume companies who are providing a product would be staffed by people knowledgeable about that product. That need not be a commissioned salesperson - particularly when the entities he is representing are non-profits.


Who's going to take the time to sit down with you and answer all your questions?  I have no problem taking time out to answer questions and present options to find out what is best for my clients.  Calling a 1-800 number isn't going to get you what's best for you.  Yeah, if I called up a lead and he said "I want $100,000 of life insurance."  I could quote him a price and sell it to him over the phone.  But, unless I take the time to get to know him and his needs, I could be over insuring him or under insuring him.  What if he actually needs $250,000?  Just saying "Sure thing, $100K of life insurance."  isn't doing him any real good.

You can't test drive a policy like you can a car.

I don't need to. What I need to know is the premium, deductible, network, max out of pocket, etc. It's not brain surgery.


You would think.  What I have learned is that there are details like, what is covered, what is not covered.  Can you get a rider to cover what's not covered, what is the exclusion to a policy.  Hell, I sell the stuff and each week I have questions that I need to call the office to answer.  

When I sell a policy I make crystal clear what the policy covers, what it won't, how to get it to cover what it's not covering (most policies have exclusions, conditions where the policy will never pay, like getting hurt while committing a felony for example), plus part of my job as salesman is to be the person to call when you have questions about your policy, instead of some call center in India.

You tell people the rules and provisions concerning what they are purchasing? How generous. There's a number on the back of the insurance card with a number on it. My insurance salesman does not answer that number when I call it. Nor does he do my COBRA administration. He doesn't even handle terminations or cancellations - I do that all online.


I can't answer why your salesman doesn't answer or return your calls.  I may not answer my phone all the time, but I do return all calls.  Doing so is in my best interest.  

And when I say that no less than 65% of all money received must be paid out in claims, it's actually a lot higher. AFLAC, for example, pays over 80% in claims.

And there goes any credibility you might have had. AFLAC is one of the magic words around here and their salespeople aren't allowed in the building. If you sell that shiat you ought to be ashamed.


First, I just pointed to another insurance company to explain that they pay more than 65% of their money in claims.  Secondly, what really is wrong with AFLAC.  I was injured in a car wreck where I was rear ended by a woman who was texting while driving.  I broke seven ribs and two shoulders.  In under a week AFLAC sent me a $5,000 check.  Since I was on disability leave and not making my full income, that $5,000 check was well needed to help make ends meet until I could go back to work three months after the car wreck.  Third, no, I don't sell AFLAC, but I do have positive experience from them.
 
2013-03-12 02:22:09 PM
Great Janitor:

Please tell I am not the only one to be thinking this when reading that tripe

www.fuenf-filmfreunde.de
 
2013-03-12 02:24:13 PM

craig328: Medical care is expensive because the act doesn't address tort reform...period.

Doctors pay ridiculously high malpractice premiums because judges and juries award ridiculous damage awards and it costs a litigant nothing to bring a lawsuit because for even borderline ludicrous claims, its more cost effective to settle rather than defend and go to trial.  What this does is force doctors to practice defensive medicine, ordering every single test they can think of so they can't be adjudged to be negligent later on.

Remove much of the lawsuit incentive, reform malpractice laws to discourage lawsuits in the first place while retaining access to the courts for egregious cases and you deflate a major driver of what drives costs through the roof.  The U.S. spends the highest, by far, per capita on healthcare and are no healthier than the rest of the world and unhealthier than many.  One of the differences in the costs is our civil court system.  It's nice to have most of the time...but this ain't one of them.

And it won't be meaningfully addressed because we elect lawyers to Congress way more than any other occupational group.


This is a myth. The cost of lawsuits represents less than .5% of the cost of healthcare.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226036480/

What would you cap mal-practice at? What if a parent brings a child to the doctor for a routine surgery and halfway in the doctors realize they don't have the right blood type for the child and cannot give a transfusion. The child gets permanent brain damage and will need around the clock care and will not be able to mature intellectually as a result of a bone headed move by the doctor. What if this was the hospital's fault because they mis labeled the blood and had a history of doing this and had covered it up? The parents bring a suit against the hospital and win a whopping $250,000. Good luck providing care for a child with that drop in the bucket. Even if the tort reform excluded the cost of care from the cap, this child could have been a healthy productive member of society, but gross negligence on the part of the system ruined this persons life. And the punitive damage is limited to $250K. That is such a tiny amount that the hospital wouldn't even notice it on their books.
 
2013-03-12 02:26:52 PM
More than that

Get ready for your Van Jones™ aluminum foil condom
 
2013-03-12 02:27:19 PM
Hey, is this the thread where I say that Obamacare is stupid because people will make the obviously logical and rational decision to drop their health insurance after it goes into effect and pay a fine instead of dropping it now and paying no fine at all?

That makes sense. Keep making that argument.

Or wait, is this the thread where people who don't understand the first thing about healthcare prices or economics and pretend that they aren't currently paying for the people who don't have insurance and think that now that people are mandated to have insurance, the cost to them is somehow going up?

Or is it both? I think what we need is education reform, because there's a lot of really stupid people out there.
 
2013-03-12 02:28:03 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: craig328: What this does is force doctors to practice defensive medicine, ordering every single test they can think of so they can't be adjudged to be negligent later on.

Yes because in no way to doctors make more money for every test they order


So let me see if I get this straight.  Your family practice doc sees you for say...a persistent cough.  Years back, your cough rates an office visit and a prescription for cough medicine with maybe a follow up visit in a couple of weeks.  These days, some docs will have you get a blood test (phelbotomist...not your doc), an x-ray or perhaps more imaging (radiologist...not your doc).  Where in there does your family doc (you know...the guy practicing the defensive medicine here) make more money on this?  HE'S not performing the test.  He's not even reading the tea leaves of the results because even tho he's likely qualified to he's not an endocrinologist or radiologist which means a lawyer will suggest he's not really qualified...so he relies on those guys.

Your doc made exactly zero extra billing there for himself.

midigod: craig328: Medical care is expensive because the act doesn't address tort reform...period.

Not correct.


Sorry, but it doesn't.  Politifact covered this point (they're pretty much as middle of the road you can get on political claims).  Sorry man but it ain't there.
 
2013-03-12 02:28:15 PM

midigod: And by the way, that 65% figure is a mandated minimum, not the desired target. I've worked for two of the largest insurers in the country, and they were constantly trying to get their own labor and admin costs down as low as they could possibly go. And then some more. Their ideal for claim costs was 90%, even though they knew they could never reach it. Dumping the brokers would have given them a free 13-18%! It's just too bad that, in many states, insurers are required to use brokers, because of the brokers' lobby.


And therein lies the problem. We should not be paying goddam sales commissions on a universal necessity. The need for health insurance in modern american society goes somewhere down the list not very far behind water, oxygen, food, and shelter. Having paid well in excess of two million dollars in health premiums on behalf of my employer in recent years it pains me to say that they guy in the fancy house who visits me once a year to go over the renewal brings precious little in value added to the whole process.
 
2013-03-12 02:29:35 PM

hardinparamedic: kendelrio: You didn't answer my question. Why should I pay for someone elses healthcare? There is no benefit to me. Why should I bust my ass to provide for my family only to have more of my wages taken to pay for someone else's benefits?

Also, at what age is a person a farking adult? Kids mandated to stay on my insurance until they're 26? That's bullshiat too. If a "kid" can go to PMITA prison for life at 18, join the military at 18, get married at 18 drink a beer or other things legally, why should I have to foot their insurance bill? So now I'm paying for MY families insurance, some farker who can't afford their insurance AND their crotchfruits insurance until they're 26? fark that!



AH, look! Crikey!

It's the elusive "I got mine, fark everyone else" mentality in it's wild, natural habitat! The anonymity of the internet literally allows it to be a complete dick to everyone else without fear of being called out and shamed by the rest of it's species.

Truly, truly majestic, it is. Beautiful plumage.


Yes, I have mine. How did I get it? I bust my ass 84 hours a week for it. I earned it.
Fark them.
 
2013-03-12 02:30:31 PM

k1j2b3: Thats No Moose: k1j2b3: Everyone HAD access to medical care before Obamacare came along.

Everyone had access to emergency medical care.

Start showing the symptoms of a long-running but manageable disease like MS and you're farked if you don't have insurance.

k1j2b3: So what did we solve exactly?

You mean apart from mandating that insurance companies not refuse people on the basis of pre-existing conditions?
Or that bit about them spending a large chunk on insurance and not on marketing and overhead?
Or that bit about expanding Medicaid?
Or that bit about letting children stay on their parents' plans longer - which is incredibly vital in this recession?

k1j2b3: And, in fact, people will STILL not have insurance with Obamacare.

And those people will pay a fine. Good.

Guess who those people will be? The low-wage workers who just got kicked from full-time to part-time work!  Not those with good jobs and health insurance. So you are okay with fining someone who makes too much money to qualify for Medicaid and can't afford to buy health insurance that has now become more expensive?  Ok. Way to care for the little guy.

And I guess you are happy with dis-incentivizing people to buy health insurance by allowing them to pay a fine until they feel they suddenly need health insurance...which then they can buy (due to the pre-existing condition situation you mentioned) with no problems?  How does this help anything?

Should we now target any other business out there who spends more than 15% of its profits on things beyond its products/services?  What about your internet service? Your cell service? Gasoline? Electricity?

Why are we focusing so much on the health care industry and what we consider to be allowable profits?  And not other businesses that also cause hardship to many people with high costs?


You need to read up on the ACA, buddy, because those people will be subsidized.
 
2013-03-12 02:32:08 PM

Great Janitor: I am licensed to sell health insurance so I am getting a kick...

I stopped selling health insurance and I am focusing on life insurance right now.  With Congress not knowing what is in the bill they passed, we don't know what insurance plans that are legal to sell today will remain legal in October when this goes into effect.  And it is going to really hurt coworkers of mine who have been in the business for ten to twenty years or more, have over two decades of built up residuals coming in each month that congress will put an end to when Obamacare comes into effect.

One explanation about Obamacare that I read is that it is not just have some insurance and you won't be fined, but rather that Obamacare level insurance could run as high as $800/month for the average family.  But, with no pre-existing conditions, coverage beginning the moment you buy your policy, why should a healthy person buy insurance when taking the tax fine is cheaper?  Think of it this way: I am healthy.  I see a doctor less than once a year.  Mandatory health insurance is a waste of money for me, just pay the annual fine.  Now, let's say I broke my leg falling down the stairs.   All I have to do is buy insurance, which would take effect instantly, get fixed up, and as soon as the leg was healed, cancel the insurance.  And with no one being rejected for insurance, they can't legally stop me from buying insurance knowing that I was only going to cancel it the moment the cast came off.


Yes. We know. That's why you should support single payer.
 
Displayed 50 of 316 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report