The health care bill explained

[Kosar_For_President]

Oh, Heck....I know you aren't dumb, and don't know how old you are, nor care.....just keeping it real.....sorry if i insulted you...I am just fired up over this...this is the beginning of the end for this country....we're done.

 

We don't have a smart population as a whole, we don't have enough jobs to support the population, and we have a class of population who has been provided for for so long they can't provide for themself.

 

I really think this discussion has been somewhat civil today. I think that people on both sides are confused and concerned. I think Heck has been taking it in strides and for the most part everyone else has been giving some good input without throwing the Obama is a Retard card out there. And I am sure Heck will agree, all opinions are good because it gets to root of the matter. It's when individuals throw the "me not like Obama card" and don't speak there mind on the issue. It's done and voted on, let's get over it and discuss the issue at hand.

[ballpeen]

BINGO. I just saw my neighbor at Giant Eagle, he is nurse for the Cleveland Clinic. That is exactly what he and some doctors speculated, he foresaw this happening. Even where he works, lol! At the Cleveland Clinic! WHAT????

 

 

It's why the fine is so low. In short order everybody is going to have to be on the plan so the people making a modest living of 40-50K can support the masses.

 

250K isn't exorbitant IMO...and they get hit with another 3.8% just so the slugs down the road can be insured while they watch Oprah during the day.

 

 

You get the insurers out of the mix, then the government can set fees that MDs charge.

 

 

20 years from now we won't have nearly as many MDs in this country...the work won't be worth the pay.

 

[Kosar_For_President]

At the present time, we have seen how progressive politicians will employ their own ideology over practicality.

 

I actually love this comment.

[Westside Steve]

It depends on the industry. Especially those that live and die by mistakes.

 

Sure I suppose so.

 

Often middle agers are set in their ways.

And often not as eager to put in a 14 hour day.

Or as willing to learn the new systems.

Or as hip to the latest technology.

Or as willing to serve a 35 year old manager.

Or work for a 24 year olds pay.

And more apt to get sick and cost the company money.

 

But of course there are places you wouldn't want a newcomer.

But you see a lotof fiftysomethings looking for positions.

I've been fortunate but it isn't gonna last forever.

 

WSS

 

WSS[/b]

[Kosar_For_President]

You get the insurers out of the mix, then the government can set fees that MDs charge.

 

You know this sort of screws doctors, in a general sense. Ok people say doctors are not going to take it and up and move shop. Where the f*ck are they going to practice? India?

[Kosar_For_President]

And more apt to get sick and cost the company money.

 

Trust me I see some law suits coming on this.

[ballpeen]

You know this sort of screws doctors, in a general sense. Ok people say doctors are not going to take it and up and move shop. Where the f*ck are they going to practice? India?

 

 

Up and comers won't go in to medicine. Why be the best and brightest, spend 4 years in college, 4 years in medical school, amassing maybe 80K student loans, then spend 4 years as a intern working 80-90 hours a week for minimal pay, then finally get your own practice at age 31-32 to make 70K a year??

 

 

Only a dummy would do that. MD's might be kind of goofy in the social sense, but they aren't stupid. If they can get through med school and the rigors of training, they can find other ways to make modest pay at far less cost....cost in many ways.

[ballpeen]

3.21.10.....now and forever more, Dependence Day.

[heckofajobbrownie]

This kind of rhetoric is going to seem strange in a few years. It always does.

[heckofajobbrownie]

It's also a bit entertaining, since it seems many of you in here are on, or have recently been on, or would like to be some form of government assistance. Some have even received government-run health care.

 

But don't let that stop you. Lousy freeloaders.

 

[Mr. T]

E.M.S. to dispatch we aint moven till we know whos payen for this crap........

[Kosar_For_President]

It's also a bit entertaining, since it seems many of you in here are on, or have recently been on, or would like to be some form of government assistance. Some have even received government-run health care.

 

But don't let that stop you. Lousy freeloaders.

 

Hey f*ck you Heck, lol. I said it from the start I am not being objective. And as I said before I am not being cynical, I am here for the facts, not some childish sociological experiment on what side of who I "stand" for.

[ballpeen]

Just a question.

 

So the fine is $650(round number) if you don't carry insurance. The cost of a plan might be $2000 or more a year.

 

What is to keep people from deciding to just pay the fine and then signing up for insurance once things start to go wrong??

 

With pre-existing conditions now out of the mix for being denied insurance, you can just sign up when you get pregnant or show some signs of a problem.

 

People won't be gambling they will never get sick....they are just gambling they won't get hit with something that strikes immediately....which is the case most of the time.

 

Most accidents are auto or work related, so your auto insurance will cover that, and you have a 50% shot it is the others persons fault, and your employers insurance will cover a work related accident.

 

Expect premiums much higher than projected.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

It's also a bit entertaining, since it seems many of you in here are on, or have recently been on, or would like to be some form of government assistance. Some have even received government-run health care.

 

But don't let that stop you. Lousy freeloaders.

 

I get Tricare, but I EARNED it through my career in the military. There is a big difference between being a non-working slug wanting everything handed to you and earning a benefit through years of hard service.

[Westside Steve]

T, please be objective here, how does this effect your business? It's done with, let's speak business here, how does this help you and people looking for jobs and your hiring outlook.

 

 

Here's one possibility.

You own a business that employs less than the required number to be forced to pay for a policy.

You may well balk at exceeding that limit.

 

Also is there any provision that prevents the employer from taking a higher percent from the employees pay for it?

 

WSS

[calfoxwc]

This doesn't adversely affect jobs and hiring... how?

 

not good.

 

btw, Heck, we all PAY INTO SS. We EARN the SS by PAYING INTO IT.

 

that's a cheap try at "moral equivalency".

 

Happens all the time with some people...

[hoorta]

It's why the fine is so low. In short order everybody is going to have to be on the plan so the people making a modest living of 40-50K can support the masses.

 

250K isn't exorbitant IMO...and they get hit with another 3.8% just so the slugs down the road can be insured while they watch Oprah during the day.

 

You get the insurers out of the mix, then the government can set fees that MDs charge.

 

20 years from now we won't have nearly as many MDs in this country...the work won't be worth the pay.

 

Two things fer certain insurance premiums are going to go up- can't deny coverage to seriously disabled kids- great for the families with newborns with Down's or other serious birth defects that are going to cost millions over the kids lifetime. Actually, I don't mind that part of of the "reform" at all.

 

What does bother me is Obamahood robbing from the rich to give to the poor. If you're really loaded, say making a million or more, most of your income isn't salary- it's investment income- and the Dems just decided you need to give 3.8% of it for the good of the country. I'll take some consolation that Socialists like Michael Moore and his uber-rich Hollywood cronies just took a major one op the tailpipe to further their agenda.

 

And the funding for this government expansion (as I said elsewhere) is pure government crackpipe economics. Cutting Medicare by billions ain't happening- the AARP Grey Panthers will guarantee that. + the Dems will never, ever let their working UAW bretheren pay a dime of tax on the gold plated insurance plans they now have.

[ballpeen]

I may add this in a couple of threads.....it is a good read IMO

 

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...1919432770.html

 

By ORRIN G. HATCH, J. KENNETH BLACKWELL AND KENNETH A. KLUKOWSKI

 

President Obama's health-care bill is now moving toward final passage. The policy issues may be coming to an end, but the legal issues are certain to continue because key provisions of this dangerous legislation are unconstitutional. Legally speaking, this legislation creates a target-rich environment. We will focus on three of its more glaring constitutional defects.

 

First, the Constitution does not give Congress the power to require that Americans purchase health insurance. Congress must be able to point to at least one of its powers listed in the Constitution as the basis of any legislation it passes. None of those powers justifies the individual insurance mandate. Congress's powers to tax and spend do not apply because the mandate neither taxes nor spends. The only other option is Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce.

 

Congress has many times stretched this power to the breaking point, exceeding even the expanded version of the commerce power established by the Supreme Court since the Great Depression. It is one thing, however, for Congress to regulate economic activity in which individuals choose to engage; it is another to require that individuals engage in such activity. That is not a difference in degree, but instead a difference in kind. It is a line that Congress has never crossed and the courts have never sanctioned.

 

In fact, the Supreme Court in United States v. Lopez (1995) rejected a version of the commerce power so expansive that it would leave virtually no activities by individuals that Congress could not regulate. By requiring Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service, Congress would be doing exactly what the court said it could not do.

 

Some have argued that Congress may pass any legislation that it believes will serve the "general welfare." Those words appear in Article I of the Constitution, but they do not create a free-floating power for Congress simply to go forth and legislate well. Rather, the general welfare clause identifies the purpose for which Congress may spend money. The individual mandate tells Americans how they must spend the money Congress has not taken from them and has nothing to do with congressional spending.

 

A second constitutional defect of the Reid bill passed in the Senate involves the deals he cut to secure the votes of individual senators. Some of those deals do involve spending programs because they waive certain states' obligation to contribute to the Medicaid program. This selective spending targeted at certain states runs afoul of the general welfare clause. The welfare it serves is instead very specific and has been dubbed "cash for cloture" because it secured the 60 votes the majority needed to end debate and pass this legislation.

 

A third constitutional defect in this ObamaCare legislation is its command that states establish such things as benefit exchanges, which will require state legislation and regulations. This is not a condition for receiving federal funds, which would still leave some kind of choice to the states. No, this legislation requires states to establish these exchanges or says that the Secretary of Health and Human Services will step in and do it for them. It renders states little more than subdivisions of the federal government.

 

This violates the letter, the spirit, and the interpretation of our federal-state form of government. Some may have come to consider federalism an archaic annoyance, perhaps an amusing topic for law-school seminars but certainly not a substantive rule for structuring government. But in New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court struck down two laws on the grounds that the Constitution forbids the federal government from commandeering any branch of state government to administer a federal program. That is, by drafting and by deliberate design, exactly what this legislation would do.

 

The federal government may exercise only the powers granted to it or denied to the states. The states may do everything else. This is why, for example, states may have authority to require individuals to purchase health insurance but the federal government does not. It is also the reason states may require that individuals purchase car insurance before choosing to drive a car, but the federal government may not require all individuals to purchase health insurance.

 

This hardly exhausts the list of constitutional problems with this legislation, which would take the federal government into uncharted political and legal territory. Analysts, scholars and litigators are just beginning to examine the issues we have raised and other issues that may well lead to future litigation.

 

America's founders intended the federal government to have limited powers and that the states have an independent sovereign place in our system of government. The Obama/Reid/Pelosi legislation to take control of the American health-care system is the most sweeping and intrusive federal program ever devised. If the federal government can do this, then it can do anything, and the limits on government power that our liberty requires will be more myth than reality.

 

[osusev]

heck seriously these people are selective hypocrites..... like I said I wonder how many of them have taken a pell grant, or have a mortgage backed from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, received unemployment benefits, VA benefits, medicare,medicaid......

 

I like how people talk about paying into social security(um social security is a MASSIVE socialism product) funny really

 

the big bad government.... bet you dont want them to disband the SEC for your 401k....... or the federal reserve (another government protection and service) for you bank account

 

hypocrites every one of you.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

heck seriously these people are selective hypocrites..... like I said I wonder how many of them have taken a pell grant, or have a mortgage backed from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, received unemployment benefits, VA benefits, medicare,medicaid......

 

I like how people talk about paying into social security(um social security is a MASSIVE socialism product) funny really

 

the big bad government.... bet you dont want them to disband the SEC for your 401k....... or the federal reserve (another government protection and service) for you bank account

 

hypocrites every one of you.

 

VA benefits are earned by serving honorably in the military so I don't know how you could compare the two. Social Security is payed into by your earned income, you have no choice, but there are no "fines". I realize you don't get VA benefits because you didn't serve in the U.S. Armed forces. But don't put down the people who do by insinuating that they are getting something for nothing.

[Westside Steve]

heck seriously these people are selective hypocrites..... like I said I wonder how many of them have taken a pell grant, or have a mortgage backed from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, received unemployment benefits, VA benefits, medicare,medicaid......

 

I like how people talk about paying into social security(um social security is a MASSIVE socialism product) funny really

 

the big bad government.... bet you dont want them to disband the SEC for your 401k....... or the federal reserve (another government protection and service) for you bank account

 

hypocrites every one of you.

 

From the guy who brags how independent self reliant and conservative he is.

 

BTW that's a great example of solvent and cost effective programs to prove your point.

 

Peen, remember the constitution (for better or worse) is in constant flux and dependent on the whims a group of appointees smaller than the Politburo.

 

Anyone who relies on protection from that document should keep that in mind.

WSS

 

 

WSS[/b]

[ballpeen]

Peen, remember the constitution (for better or worse) is in constant flux and dependent on the whims a group of appointees smaller than the Politburo.

 

Anyone who relies on protection from that document should keep that in mind.

WSS

 

 

I understand that, but that is really all we have. It also allows us to spot the leopards, so at least in that context it protects us.

 

Now, whether we do anything about it or not is another matter.

 

It's kind of like the household dog. A bump in the night will agitate the dog and it will sound the alarm. It's our choice to get up and take action or just roll over and go back to sleep.

[Pumpkin Eater]

It's also a bit entertaining, since it seems many of you in here are on, or have recently been on, or would like to be some form of government assistance. Some have even received government-run health care.

 

But don't let that stop you. Lousy freeloaders.

 

 

Wow. OK. Now you wish to limit freedom of speech? I can't say anything bad about the government because, after many years of paying payroll taxes, I am getting some of it back through unemployment. Typical liberal reasoning.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Um, you're missing the point. Completely. I'm not against you collecting unemployment. You can go back and find me arguing for an extension of unemployment benefits just a week ago. I want you to get an unemployment check right now.

 

The point was that we've heard from so many in here about how health care reform is socialism, or welfare for people who take advantage of the system, or that it encourages laziness, takes from the productive and gives to those who don't work, and that government programs ruin everything -- the "lousy freeloaders" argument. But the more I talk to you guys, one after another steps up and admits that you're on the same sort of government assistance and using the same type of government programs that you just got done railing against. I find it a tad bizarre.

 

Of course, when you take advantage of these programs "you paid into them." Joe the Plumber also made this argument. And it's true - you do pay into them. And you have a right to take advantage of them. That's what they're designed to do.

 

But everyone who works pays into the system. Unless you imagine that there's a whole swatch of Americans who simply never work, everyone else could be making the same argument you're making. The laziest grifter in the world could make this argument because he once worked at Kenny Shoes for a couple years. And yet we still hear the refrain that it's the people who won't work that get all the benefits. It's simply a canard.

 

It's mostly people just like you. It's people who want to work, but can't find it.

 

As for you suggesting I'm attacking your freedom of speech rights ...huh? Nowhere in here do I claim anything remotely like that, or suggested that you can't say what you want to say, and that I want the government to strip you of the right to say it. That's ridiculous.

 

I'm simply disagreeing with you.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Here's another good graphic for guys like Kosar and John that wanted more specifics about what the bill does for them. Probably more helpful than the LA Times one.

 

Like here's one for an uninsured, self-employed single guy making $40,000:

 

Now: He can get subsidized coverage through a new high-risk insurance program until 2014. The premiums for the program will be “established for a standard population,” according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. His out-of-pocket medical costs will be capped at $5,950.

 

In 2014: He could receive subsidies to help him buy insurance from his state’s health insurance exchange. Based on his current income, he will not spend more than $2,850 on premiums and his out-of-pocket medical expenses will also be capped.

After 2013, insurers cannot charge higher premiums or deny coverage because of a pre-existing medical condition. Plans could be excluded from exchanges for unjustified premium increases and they also must spend at least 85 percent of their revenues on medical claims.

[osusev]

funny steve.... I am self reliant and have funded my companies myself. I was making a point at how the "government" has programs to protect the public like the SEC,FDIC,FBI,FCC,FEC, etc etc that I bet all of you benefit from......

 

Its not about "taking over" its about oversight and accountability in the largest most unchecked industry in our country that affects EVERYONE and WILL bankrupt our country. The logic is so simple it is simply almost Retarded NOT to do exactly what we are doing....

 

We pay the most and literally our OVERALL efficiency, quality and costs are poor..... not to mention this is major threat in terms of solvency of our entire budget for EXISTING programs (that you right wingers helped only increase without ANY offsetting income with medicare's expansion.......

 

the logic is funny really.

 

T...... seriously YOU VOLUNTEERED for the JOB....... its not like you did not have other options.... your benefits for basically an at will employee for a contractual term that you were paid for Voluntarily grants you respect maybe for some moral purpose but in terms of contribution does not make you more or less than any other citizen who helps contribute to our country....... get over yourself and what you think you are due.

 

I am happy you like my father accessed VA benefits..... I dont begrudge those benefits it was a job perk that happens to last longer than your AT WILL employment.

 

seriously you right wingers have totally gone off the cliff.

[Mr. T]

Health Care Explained!!! Yikes!!!

 

I have been informed that our family will be looking into the state run insurance pool soon.

 

Since the HC bill has passed and to curb costs, my wifes employer is going to be dropping their group health care benefit.

 

 

Sounds like these Pukes in DC really fixed the health insurance debacle. .....bastards!

[Mr. T]

T...... seriously YOU VOLUNTEERED for the JOB....... its not like you did not have other options.... your benefits for basically an at will employee for a contractual term that you were paid for Voluntarily grants you respect maybe for some moral purpose but in terms of contribution does not make you more or less than any other citizen who helps contribute to our country....... get over yourself and what you think you are due.

 

I am happy you like my father accessed VA benefits..... I dont begrudge those benefits it was a job perk that happens to last longer than your AT WILL employment.

 

seriously you right wingers have totally gone off the cliff.

 

 

What the hell are you saying and who the hell are you talking to? ...Dude go take your meds.

 

For starters, I never said crap about VA benefits, or VA hospitals.

[osusev]

What the hell are you saying and who the hell are you talking to? ...Dude go take your meds.

 

For starters, I never said crap about VA benefits, or VA hospitals.

 

sorry meant diehard

[Westside Steve]

funny steve.... I am self reliant and have funded my companies myself. I was making a point at how the "government" has programs to protect the public like the SEC,FDIC,FBI,FCC,FEC, etc etc that I bet all of you benefit from......

 

True enough Sev.

Thiose werent'the examples you used. I use the Post Office from time to time as well, and they're broke AND they suck.

My beef with the bill is that I don't think the penalty for non compliance is stiff enough. And that I don't trust politicians to fairly cut costs.

And while we all agree that costs will most likely be substantial;ly higher than projected I fear they'll be monstrously higher. But that's just a cautionary fear.

And it's a disgrace to not have real tort reform.

 

Its not about "taking over" its about oversight and accountability in the largest most unchecked industry in our country that affects EVERYONE and WILL bankrupt our country. The logic is so simple it is simply almost Retarded NOT to do exactly what we are doing....

 

No more Retarded than to not notice other similarly well intentioned government programs at the brink of bankruptcy. Or trusting politicians to regulate.

 

We pay the most and literally our OVERALL efficiency, quality and costs are poor..... not to mention this is major threat in terms of solvency of our entire budget for EXISTING programs (that you right wingers helped only increase without ANY offsetting income with medicare's expansion.......

 

the logic is funny really.

 

Funny as you railing against it now?

 

T...... seriously YOU VOLUNTEERED for the JOB....... its not like you did not have other options.... your benefits for basically an at will employee for a contractual term that you were paid for Voluntarily grants you respect maybe for some moral purpose but in terms of contribution does not make you more or less than any other citizen who helps contribute to our country....... get over yourself and what you think you are due.

 

I am happy you like my father accessed VA benefits..... I dont begrudge those benefits it was a job perk that happens to last longer than your AT WILL employment.

 

seriously you right wingers have totally gone off the cliff.

 

I'll leave the VA bashing or praising to th vets.

 

WSS