Details of the new Healthcare bill get better..

[Mr Bogus]

Senate health bill targets ?Cadillac? plans - Health care- msnbc.com

The Senate Democrats' bill, unveiled last week, would impose a 40 percent tax on insurance premiums above $8,500 for an individual and $23,000 for a family. Those thresholds represent the total paid by both employer and employee.


I tell you, if you doubt any of the motivation behind this "reform" it is for revenue... 2.5% for people without plans, 40% for those with good plans... these guys can bite my azz..

I will cancel my current policy and go on the govt role... isnt that what they want? already have 35M people on food stamps (bet over half should not be there)..

WTF? I defy you to tell me who this "reform" will benefit besides the tax roles.... just outrageous that this is going to go through.. (then the complaining will start... "oh we didnt know" déjà vu all over again.."

 

[Dino]

Wow! Who pays that much for premiums? I have a great plan that covers my sons and me and I pay about $3600.00 a year.

 

[Dr E]

At my wifes work a married couple of two has a plan cost close to 18,000/year, throw in two children and that jumps to 20,000/year and that is with a 6000/year contribution by the company. This is a State plan! (This is a power generation plant hence company/state mixing). She is covered under my plan which is a better and costs less.

I am truly worried about where we are headed... I have written, I have called both our State representatives and State Senators, I hope there are enough people doing the same thing.

 

[MET]

Many pay that much. Remember it is Employee contribution and your company for a total of.

 

[Mr Bogus]

Politicos and Govt employees are woefully out of touch with the system that provides their subsidized life styles.. These changes are going to directly affect the people most in need..

Many under 40 carry no insurance and why should they? if you are healthy, it is your prerogative to pass on "insurance" (it is not called "Mandatory" right?)

So... lets bend that group over for 2.5% of their take home pay (for now, next year we will determine that this was not enough and go to 5% or even 10% like we did with SS)

Now the people that really need insurance and have to pay for it, should also have to pay a 40% tax on this coverage (most of the +55 age group).. This can and will cause many to just drop coverage and go to Medicare.. (that should improve the quality of life for many right?)

 

[Dino]

Politicos and Govt employees are woefully out of touch with the system that provides their subsidized life styles.. These changes are going to directly affect the people most in need..

Many under 40 carry no insurance and why should they? if you are healthy, it is your prerogative to pass on "insurance" (it is not called "Mandatory" right?) Many?????

So... lets bend that group over for 2.5% of their take home pay (for now, next year we will determine that this was not enough and go to 5% or even 10% like we did with SS)

Now the people that really need insurance and have to pay for it, should also have to pay a 40% tax on this coverage (most of the +55 age group).. This can and will cause many to just drop coverage and go to Medicare.. (that should improve the quality of life for many right?)

Please cite this opinion...thanks

 

[chrisjp]

Wow! Who pays that much for premiums? I have a great plan that covers my sons and me and I pay about $3600.00 a year.

i do!! 219 a week with company contribution of 1088 a month. 24444$ a year
but we voted for the lessor plan with 1500$ deductable and 3000$ max family and that is 127$ week with 1088 a month contibution from company. or 19660$ a year!!! and i still have to pay deductable before coverage

 

[Dino]

i do!! 219 a week with company contribution of 1088 a month. 24444$ a year
but we voted for the lessor plan with 1500$ deductable and 3000$ max family and that is 127$ week with 1088 a month contibution from company. or 19660$ a year!!! and i still have to pay deductable before coverage

That is crazy. We really need to put caps on health care costs so insurance premiums are not so high.

 

[aussiekeeper]

It is about power....more people on the dole, the more power the Gov has over them. It is also about wealth re-distribution. Since the people (us) will never go for retribution (remember the slave thing?) Obama wants those who have money to pay via the healthcare plan. Believe me, that was the plan from the get go. Between the wealth re-distribution and the gun control, we are headed quickly towards complete government control of our everyday lives. Do not get fooled by the "do good" statements and policies, If we remove the masks from these insane new laws, there is Marxism under the surface...............

 

[Mr Bogus]

55.3% of the uninsured in the US were 18-35 (very low risk group)
14.8% (of the +65 crowd? 1.4%) of the uninsured in the US were 45+

That covers 75% of the uninsured..

This is from 2008 figures compiled by the US Govt themselves.. you telling me they don't know what end of the cow they are milking?

You have just included the TWO single largest groups to tax.. The young uninsured in line for a fine of their income @ 2.5% and the older high premium insured @ 40% paying large premiums.....

bend over rover, send bama on over...

where is that brainwash soap... "we are the govt, we have your best interests in mind... we want to control health insurance... NOW STFU and drink the koolaid"

 

[Mr Bogus]

That is crazy. We really need to put caps on health care costs so insurance premiums are not so high.

"We" ? you have no idea how insurance premiums are derived by the actuaries...

 

[Dino]

55.3% of the uninsured in the US were 18-35 (very low risk group)
14.8% of the uninsured in the US were 45+

That covers 80% of the uninsured..

This is from 2008 figures compiled by the US Govt themselves.. you telling me they don't know what end of the cow they are milking?

You have just included the TWO single largest groups to tax.. The young uninsured and the older high premium insured...

where is that brainwash soap...

Is that uninsured by choice or circumstance? What I mean is, are they uninsured because they feel they do not need it and choose not to get it, or are they uninsured because it is too expensive?

Lets also not forget that this age range dose not have very high annual income (your income rises, in general, with your age). So it is reasonable to believe they are un-insured by circumstance not by choice.

You make the claim that 18-35 year olds are a "very low risk group", what is that based upon? Low-Risk for what? Chronic Diseases, yes but they are high risk for injuries and deaths due to accidents.

 

[Dino]

"We" ? you have no idea how insurance premiums are derived by the actuaries...

Exactly....all the more reason to do away with health care insurance all together and provide universal care.

 

[Bird Hunter]

Exactly....all the more reason to do away with health care insurance all together and provide universal care.

Yeah, let's let our proven government health care professionals handle our health care !!! Their doing a fantastic job with Medicare/Medicaid, and the V.A. system.... OMFG, I can't wait !!lease:

 

[Dino]

"We" ? you have no idea how insurance premiums are derived by the actuaries...

Yeah, let's let our proven government health care professionals handle our health care !!! Their doing a fantastic job with Medicare/Medicaid, and the V.A. system.... OMFG, I can't wait !!lease:

If they are so bad why do people continue to use them? Why not just choose something else?

 

[Bird Hunter]

If they are so bad why do people continue to use them? Why not just choose something else?

Is that a serious question ??

 

[Dino]

If they are so bad why do people continue to use them? Why not just choose something else?

Is that a serious question ??

For the sake of the discussion, lets say it is. Do you think you could answer it?

 

[Mr Bogus]

Is that a serious question ??

was my thought as well.... but I will take the moment to spell it out for him...

First off the stated groups are there because they already require Govt health care...

Second, this has nothing to do with "quality" of care... these people have no choice "who" their providers are and in MANY cases, CAN NOT go to whom they want because MANY wont accept them as patients...

We wouldnt accept a M/care, M/caid patient if we had empty offices... the paper work is abhorrent, the pay schedule is a joke and many of the patients really could care less about their own health anyway, they are just looking for free rides and disability benefits..

All of which screw it up for the truly needy...

I am still waiting for the "1" (as in one) program the govt runs well.... really just 1 good one... (and printing money does not count)

be back after lunch to laugh some more...

 

[Dino]

was my thought as well.... but I will take the moment to spell it out for him...

First off the stated groups are there because they already require Govt health care...

Second, this has nothing to do with "quality" of care... these people have no choice "who" their providers are and in MANY cases, CAN NOT go to whom they want because MANY wont accept them as patients...

We wouldnt accept a M/care, M/caid patient if we had empty offices... the paper work is abhorrent, the pay schedule is a joke and many of the patients really could care less about their own health anyway, they are just looking for free rides and disability benefits..

All of which screw it up for the truly needy...

I am still waiting for the "1" (as in one) program the govt runs well.... really just 1 good one... (and printing money does not count)

be back after lunch to laugh some more...

That is my point. You should not have the choice who you get to accept.

 

[racerV]

That is my point. You should not have the choice who you get to accept.

Oh my gosh, that is so hypocritical! You object to government control and involvement yet you think that they should be allowed to force us into this?