View Full Version : 2010 Healthcare Bill Discussion
Gerrymander
03-24-2010, 06:39
The shoutbox makes me think we need a legit thread about all this.
Here's the shoutbox convo up till now (read from the bottom up...too lazy to format):
[23-03, 21:49] deathofcheese A little bit of both. They're bigger than just some riffraff rabble, but yes, media, particularly Faux News, is exaggerating how big they are. Can't fault them on one thing: they know how to get vocal.
[23-03, 20:42] Colonel Skills are the teaparty folks really as big a force as they seem to be or is it the media blowing shit out of proportion again like when they look at middle eastern people and just show random pictures of explosions
[23-03, 20:41] Colonel Skills ok I'm getting sick of seeing this on the news.
[23-03, 17:02] Arainach I imagine the "stupidity" is his plan to "reduce the deficit" by, duh duh DUH, slashing taxes for the uber-rich, a plan that has NEVER in the history of this country worked.
[23-03, 02:32] Gerrymander KM, the national debt is already mathematically impossible to pay off because we currently owe more money than actually exists. But it's no biggy, because if anyone bothers to ask us to pay it back, the concept of money as we know it will completely collapse. So...there are worse things than 'making the debt worse'
[22-03, 11:42] Colonel Skills I would go so far as to say YOUR ENTIRE COUNTRY is doing it
[22-03, 11:42] Colonel Skills to be quite honest a LOT of people are making dump off the cuff remarks.
[22-03, 11:32] Killer_Man_ He's been mostly saying that Obama is a fucktard for the healthcare because it'll make our debt worse.
[22-03, 07:00] deathofcheese I could link you to the Facebook post...I'm not claiming anything, just putting it out there. Maybe he made a couple of not-well-thought-out off-the-cuff remarks yesterday before the healthcare reform vote.
[22-03, 00:20] Killer_Man_ Saying stupid things such as? Give proof before you claim.
[21-03, 22:23] deathofcheese What's your guy Ryan been up to, recently, aside from possibly saying some stupid things?
[21-03, 21:52] deathofcheese Hey KM, this one's for you. A friend of mine put on Facebook: "My name is Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin), and I am dumb as hell."
[21-03, 21:41] Killer_Man_ It's ok, a lot of the states are fighting it and supposely are going to use the 10th Amendment to repeal it apparently.
[21-03, 20:44] Colonel Skills happy health reform day, americans.
Ready, set, DISCUSS!
Killer_Man_
03-24-2010, 06:57
From what I understand, 15 of the states are saying the Federal gov't have gone beyond what their power is.
http://cnmnewsnetwork.com/14120/2010-government-health-care-reform-bill-facts-pros-and-cons-details-and-text-of-obamas-healthcare-bill/
http://cnmnewsnetwork.com/13917/states-sue-over-health-care-bill-passed-%E2%80%93-fight-for-health-care-not-over-yet/
The biggest complaint is over the part of the bill that requires Americans to purchase insurance, or else pay a fine. Some states have even started or completed legislation blocking federal mandates requiring individuals to purchase state insurance. Over 35 states have vowed to make such legislation.
The quote is from the second URL.
Gerrymander
03-24-2010, 09:02
The unfortunate problem is that the current system of privatized health care has become distressingly corrupt and ineffective, with insurance companies dropping coverage if people get expensively sick (contract HIV, get cancer, etc), and denying coverage to those with 'preexisting conditions' (read: diabetes) who probably need it the most. Along with this, any attempt to pass something like a public option or single payer system would be decried as communism and shouted out of legislation.
The current bill attempts to fix the system as it is by patching over some of the worst practices - that is, dropping coverage when people get sick, lifetime coverage limits, and denying coverage because of preexisting conditions.
Without the individual mandate, this could easily break the system. What would stop people from only paying for insurance when they got sick, and then immediately canceling their plan as soon as they got better? The result would be insurance companies hemorrhaging money until bankrupt, which would place them entirely at the mercy of government bailout or plain ol' going out of business. We would end up with either a single-payer system, or an indirect single-payer system.
So, the individual mandate is a vital part of this particular bill. Without it, the current US healthcare system would implode. The plus side to it is that it means that with a large base of relatively low-risk payers, healthcare companies can afford to lower their premiums to more reasonable rates.
Killer_Man_
03-24-2010, 09:39
The unfortunate problem is that the current system of privatized health care has become distressingly corrupt and ineffective, with insurance companies dropping coverage if people get expensively sick (contract HIV, get cancer, etc), and denying coverage to those with 'preexisting conditions' (read: diabetes) who probably need it the most. Along with this, any attempt to pass something like a public option or single payer system would be decried as communism and shouted out of legislation.
The current bill attempts to fix the system as it is by patching over some of the worst practices - that is, dropping coverage when people get sick, lifetime coverage limits, and denying coverage because of preexisting conditions.
Yes, I know of such, because I have a co-worker who can't cover her kid because he has a pre-existing condition due to child birth.(Something about his intestines being out of place and at times he cramps up/has problems going taking a crap.)
Without the individual mandate, this could easily break the system. What would stop people from only paying for insurance when they got sick, and then immediately canceling their plan as soon as they got better? The result would be insurance companies hemorrhaging money until bankrupt, which would place them entirely at the mercy of government bailout or plain ol' going out of business. We would end up with either a single-payer system, or an indirect single-payer system.
So, the individual mandate is a vital part of this particular bill. Without it, the current US healthcare system would implode. The plus side to it is that it means that with a large base of relatively low-risk payers, healthcare companies can afford to lower their premiums to more reasonable rates.I would never cry communism, so your saying that everyone should pay the same rate regardless of how well they are.(Not saying sick should pay more) Regardless if they want it or not?
It's kinda like car insurance. Though I can understand why they would require everyone to get it. After all, accidents do happen and it helps both parties if they have insurance.
But Gerry, as a male of 22. I rarely or never go to the doctor. The only serious thing to happen to me is I broke my arm about a year or two ago. (Even though tax payer's money paid for all of it save for the emergency room bill) I barely make enough money to help my parents, go to college, pay my own bills and etc. And the primary thing I do is give money to my parents so we have food for two weeks(My mother and I work for the same company and the pay is bi-weekly).
I really do not think they have the right to force me to pay XX amount of dollars at all for insurance.
The idea they have is great, but really, I do not like being forced into having insurance when I know I couldn't even afford to take care of myself.
I've already read about how they will force insurance companies to never drop you regardless, cover your kids till they are 26 and many other great things but come on Gerry, you should know by now that even if we had more people paying into health insurance. It would be just lining the pockets of the big men and women who run insurance companies.
Especially with the way the economy is and how people can afford so little due to the power of the dollar dwindling.
I really do not feel comfortable with the way the bill is.
Car insurance is still expensive even though every state in the mid-west(I'm sure of it cause I know Ary said that Michagen(sp?) is forced, I know IL is forced and Wisconsin recently is forcing car insurance) and many other states are turning around and forcing it too.
Yet, car insurance still expensive. I would have to pay 150 bucks a month for car insurance. Why? Because I'm a male and I am more likely to be 'reckless' even though I am not. I have my license but the only thing stopping me from having a car and driving one is the cost to maintain, gas it up and pay for car INSURANCE.
I see this situation becoming the same way, the prices may go up, it may come down but in the long run. It'll be lining the coffers of the filthy rich again.
deathofcheese
03-24-2010, 10:50
Here are a couple nice summary-type articles that just explain what's in the bill rather than argue why something is good or bad or how it's going to kill Amuricuh.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/22/AR2010032200410.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20000846-503544.html
I think it's funny how a tax on tanning salons will go to pay for a good bit of this. A friend of mine posited that "WTF PEOPLE SHOULD BE FREE TO GIVE THEMSELVES SKIN CANCER", but then again, they could always just go lay out in the sun for free.
I'm kinda upset about what happened to abortions being off insurance. Isn't the point of having medical insurance not having to pay for medical procedures? Still, there were exceptions included for rape, incest, and danger to the mother, so it's not all bad.
I don't know why being forced to have health insurance is so bad. We're already forced to have car insurance if you drive a car, and having health isn't really optional (unless you're dead) so why not have health insurance? It starts you paying into the system so that you can't get away with dodging medical bills when you do require medical treatment/aid. Yes yes, "government's meddling with my life!" and all that, but stop being stupid. Health insurance is a good idea (unless you're so rich that you can afford to pay out-of-pocket for everything, in which case stfu and go buy some minimum plan that only covers scrapes and bruises or something) which may not necessarily be required for your purposes but is required for the purposes of someone that treats you in an emergency when you can't pay right away. At least your physician will get something, which is a point a lot of people already in healthcare repeatedly make how they're already paid crappily and how passing healthcare anything will make it even worse.
As for "blah blah blah it's raising taxes on the poor", I see three new taxes being implemented with this: Medicare Payroll tax, Excise tax, and Tanning tax. (I'm kinda miffed I don't see a Soda tax or a heftier Smoking tax, especially since these are more pointed towards health risks, but whatever.) MP tax is on investment income; in 2012, the tax will be expanded to include unearned income making it a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for families making more than $250,000 per year, or $200k for individuals. The Excise Tax will begin in 2018 requiring insurance companies to pay a 40 percent excise tax on high-end ("Cadillac") insurance plans worth over $27,500 for families. Dental and vision plans are exempt. And then there's the aforementioned tanning tax which is a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning services.
I've seen and heard arguments about how it's cheaper to just continue paying the fine and wait to get health insurance until you really need it. Anyone have a good explanation of this or argument against it?
Also, how does this reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first ten years? I can see where raising taxes helps that, but if so many subsidies will be thrown out to better help people pay for the insurance that they suddenly need to have, wouldn't that kinda suck up a lot of money, especially since Medicare and Medicaid are getting expanded by a lot?
I think it's a start. It's not nice, but it's a start.
Bloodcinder
03-24-2010, 11:37
I am required to pay for car insurance because the government has licensed me to use a dangerous and heavy moving object in a public space where I may harm the lives and property of other licensed individuals.
I do not need a license to be healthy. My health has no bearing on anyone else in any realistic scenario. Why should I be required to insure it?
Car insurance and health insurance are not valid to compare. Please don't go there.
deathofcheese
03-24-2010, 12:02
You insure your health in the case that something happens to your health so that you can no longer take care of it alone and that the people that help you restore it aren't shafted in being uncompensated in their efforts, services or materials rendered. Hearing you put the comparison the way you do, I find that I'm inclined to agree; I hadn't thought about it like that. However, whereas people can have their own insurance to help them take care of damages to their property caused by people without their own insurance, there is no insurance, as far as I know, that helps people cover unpaid medical expenses incurred because someone doesn't have their own health insurance and skipped out on the bill.
However, you're right. It is an unfair direct comparison (although arguments could be made that they are partly comparable, I think). Further, as someone already pointed out, if you have no choice but to buy health insurance and don't pick a very good one, all your monies could just go to a bank account somewhere and never get released to aid you when you have need of them. This reform attempted to fix that and started, but there's still a long way to go.
Arainach
03-24-2010, 12:59
Insurance should only be mandated if there's a public option. Period. Otherwise everyone gets screwed in the end (look at how artificially inflated auto insurance rates are in states that mandate you have it)
SpaceProg
03-24-2010, 13:35
I want my Socialist Democratic Utopia, Dammit!
Insurance should only be mandated if there's a public option. Period. Otherwise everyone gets screwed in the end (look at how artificially inflated auto insurance rates are in states that mandate you have it)
The health insurance thingy is going up for vote in the election in November.
And I live in a state that requires auto insurance and mines not bad at all...ofcorse I'm a 27 year old female with a pretty clean record
Killer_Man_
03-24-2010, 16:44
Insurance should only be mandated if there's a public option. Period. Otherwise everyone gets screwed in the end (look at how artificially inflated auto insurance rates are in states that mandate you have it)
THIS.
I've said it before in my long ramble. Since everyone HAS TO HAVE IT, then people will be like, oh hay, they have to pay for it so lets all raise it up at the same time and make a killing!
DoC: There are more than just smoking and eating that cause health problems. While you are at it, lets tax video games, PC games and other things that cause you problems. How about booze? Lets tax that too. Lets tax every little bad thing that could cause problems in your health. That way everyone can live to 100 and put a strain on everything even more.
chefTENGU
03-24-2010, 17:17
All the fuss about the requirement to get coverage to get health insurance is much ado about nothing, in my opinion. The bill also provides tax breaks for middle class families and small businesses so that they can afford to get a minimum of coverage.
Gerry summed it up best. When everyone contributes, everyone gets taken care of, and costs go down across the board because the insurance companies have more money to provide (already the lion's share of your health insurance premium goes to pay health care cost, I'm pretty sure only 10% or less translates into profit for the insurance company) and we no longer have the problem of people who can't afford insurance going to the emergency room for every minor thing and then getting stuck with an astronomical bill which they can't pay.
One of the reasons we need universal coverage is because the old system was self-defeating for that very reason:
Uninsured person gets sniffles -> Goes to emergency room -> Gets huge bill, can't pay -> Health insurance costs go up because hospitals continue to lose money in such a way
What everyone who's been clamoring about "I DON'T WANNA PAY FOR NOBODY BUT ME!" doesn't realize is that everyone who has insurance has already been picking up the tab for the uninsured for years now.
Gerrymander
03-24-2010, 22:04
I've said it before in my long ramble. Since everyone HAS TO HAVE IT, then people will be like, oh hay, they have to pay for it so lets all raise it up at the same time and make a killing!
The bill includes premium caps so this very thing can't happen.
Bloodcinder
03-24-2010, 23:56
Insurance should only be mandated if there's a public option. Period. Otherwise everyone gets screwed in the end (look at how artificially inflated auto insurance rates are in states that mandate you have it)
Thank you.
Seegtease
03-25-2010, 00:33
Guy in my church always, always pays for his medical bills up front, in cash. To say the least, he's a little irritated that he will be fined for continuing in his responsible ways.
Killer_Man_
03-25-2010, 02:23
Guy in my church always, always pays for his medical bills up front, in cash. To say the least, he's a little irritated that he will be fined for continuing in his responsible ways.
That too.
Bloodcinder
03-25-2010, 14:11
Which means he's ultimately going to pay into this new system more than any of us ever will while getting fewer benefits. There's a name for that system.
Killer_Man_
03-25-2010, 15:37
Socialism? Being a red flag commie? :P
I always paid my bills in cash and in full too. Though, the only time I couldn't was when I broke my arm, tax payers paid for that one. I had to pay for the emergency room.
deathofcheese
03-25-2010, 17:40
Out of genuine curiosity, what about for large procedures like emergencies or surgery? All out-of-pocket in one lump sum?
chefTENGU
03-25-2010, 20:01
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. If you're paying with cash for medical emergencies, it means you're carrying an irresponsible amount of cash around. If you're going for a simple checkups, then some plans currently (and soon to be, all plans) let you get those for free.
Socialism? Being a red flag commie? :P
Just Say No to Socialism
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the United States Department of Energy. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the Federal Communications Commission regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I watched this while eating my breakfast of United States Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration.
At the appropriate time as regulated by the United States congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the United States Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads built by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the United States Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.
After work, I drive my NHTSA car back home on DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.
I then log onto the internet which was developed by the defense advanced research projects administration and post on freerepublic.com and fox news forums about how socialsism in medicine is bad because the government can't do anything right.
Seegtease
03-25-2010, 23:43
Okay, I have no clue if he literally pays in cash. He may write a check for all I know, but the fact of the matter is he has the money in his bank account and he uses it to pay his medical bills, and his checks would clear instantly. Just as responsible. And now punishable by fine.
deathofcheese
03-26-2010, 00:01
Cash/check/debit is all the same to me. But he really pays for ALL medical procedures, including the really expensive ones like emergency room visits and inpatient surgeries, in one lump sum from money that he owns?
Bloodcinder
03-26-2010, 00:12
Ugh. Thread is dead. Gonna go masturbate.
SpaceProg
03-26-2010, 00:45
Sounds like a good idea. Me 2.
Killer_Man_
03-26-2010, 03:50
Yes, but if he has that much money, he could very well always have insurance or already has it.
The only reason I'm kinda miffed is because if I can't afford insurance or insurance that my company HAS to give me. It dips into my check, in which I have to suffer even worse than I am now.
It's not going to work out.
And Tiger, I was being sarcastic but I get what you are saying.
Though to be honest, the roads here in Wisconsin are crappy and they take forever to fix. Mostly cause ice + concrete is not good.
I just hope they are smart enough that lower income family gets a different pay rate but really it's going to hurt...
Or rich people are going to plan to assassinate Obama because they hae to pay more.
chefTENGU
03-26-2010, 09:39
The only reason I'm kinda miffed is because if I can't afford insurance or insurance that my company HAS to give me. It dips into my check, in which I have to suffer even worse than I am now.
Except this legislation will make health insurance more affordable for everyone, and guarantees that you'll be able to get coverage. Said coverage will allow you free preventative check-ups to keep you healthy, and give you a safety net if you DO need something.
Anyone who can afford to buy new video games can afford to get health insurance, especially if you're only trying to get coverage for yourself.
You'll "suffer" much more without insurance than you will with it.
And now punishable by fine.
Guys....none of this is set in stone yet untill its voted on in the November elections.
Killer_Man_
03-26-2010, 15:20
Except this legislation will make health insurance more affordable for everyone, and guarantees that you'll be able to get coverage. Said coverage will allow you free preventative check-ups to keep you healthy, and give you a safety net if you DO need something.
Anyone who can afford to buy new video games can afford to get health insurance, especially if you're only trying to get coverage for yourself.
You'll "suffer" much more without insurance than you will with it.
How am I suffering more without it? I am healthy even now.
Uh, no I can't. You do realize that video games I buy are about 20-50 bucks? I make 220-350 bi-weekly. 42 go to cell phone, 60-100 goes to my parents(for rent), 42 go to Time Warner, and half of left over goes to a bank account to save and the other half I get to use for myself.
Sometimes I have to pay more to my parents then even 100 bucks. Chef, your just not understand one bit. I shouldn't be forced into health insurance if I know I can't budget it in. Better yet, don't want to have to budget in.
If I wanted to drive and have a car for myself, it would cost more than I can afford. So I don't drive/have car insurance. Trust me, even with a cap, I think this is going to be bad news.
It's just like when I had qualified for the community care(Which tax payers pay into to help those in need) cause I did need a saftey net when I broke my arm. Sure, insurance might have helped butj like I said I can't afford it in my budget nor do I really need it at this point. I do have life insurance which I pay 15 bucks bi-weekly from aflac. Regardless, I think if everyone has health insurance, then I think everyone is going to go in for every scrap, cough, sneeze and bruise. Which could cause problems methinks.
Arainach
03-26-2010, 15:52
Better yet, don't want to have to budget in.Your not wanting to budget it in hurts everyone else. It's the same as Motorcycle riders who don't want to wear helmets or people who don't save for retirement - eventually you'll be costing the rest of us a shitload of money when you smash your head open/can't work and have no money to pay for anything.
Killer_Man_
03-26-2010, 16:35
Your not wanting to budget it in hurts everyone else. It's the same as Motorcycle riders who don't want to wear helmets or people who don't save for retirement - eventually you'll be costing the rest of us a shitload of money when you smash your head open/can't work and have no money to pay for anything.
Yeah, that's why I have money in my savings just sitting there collecting interest so I can pay for things. I have a good amount in there for 'emergencies'.
Ary, I have no room in my budget unless you don't want me to save anything because that's where the 50 bucks or so I put into my savings account to save for later in life(Such as a car or house or even just save it till I get old) and etc. It would go into health insurance.
Besides from what I notice, most elderly give anyway 90% of their assets to their kids so nursing homes or whatever don't take it. So they can get everything paid for by medicare or medicaid. Whatever....
So, now it's a decision mostly, either I don't save some money, cut back on what I have to pay my parents(Which means either less food or other needy things to live). That's basically it. I haven't bought anything new for myself in months.
The only reason I don't budget it in because of the fact that the only thing that happens to me is the shit out of luck situations or the 'shit hits the fan.'
Not to mention, when my mom had her heart attack, mind you she has my company's insurance which she pays 125 bi-weekly for it which is the second best insurance to get.(there are 4 levels, the highest is like 185 bi weekly).
And they would only pay 60% of everything, including the emergency room and etc. She was denied community care because of the fact she has health insurance but she only makes like 18k a year.
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml
Which is below the FPL for 4 people. Which means she has to pay 5-20 bucks a month so they don't garnish her wages because she can't pay 10k just out of no where.
chefTENGU
03-26-2010, 17:24
Unless you've got tens of thousands of dollars sitting in your savings account, it's likely not enough to pay for medical eventualities (if not for you, then perhaps for one of your family members). Just because you're feeling healthy RIGHT NOW doesn't mean you won't get sick or have an accident.
Unless you never plan on ever going to the doctor ever again, it's always in your best interest to have health insurance (assuming you get yourself a plan that isn't completely retarded). Even if you always pay out-of-pocket for everything (like the fellow Zeit mentioned), you're probably paying too much.
Example: a few years back, my uncle had to visit the emergency room with a broken ankle, and got hit with a bill in excess of $1,000. Knowing that such a figure to mend a broken ankle is pure horseshit, he immediately got his insurance company on the phone. They told the hospital something along the lines of "You must be out of your minds. You can get $50 from the patient now, and we'll give you $500. End of story." Without an insurance company backing you up, you have absolutely no leverage to negotiate.
Anyone who buys two video games in a month, can afford health insurance for themselves. I have to pay for a family plan which is scads more expensive and still comes to less than $200 a month (the price of about 4 games).
deathofcheese
03-26-2010, 18:19
I see several places you could cut in order to afford health insurance. Since those are likely your base entertainment sources that you "can't live without" and that I "shouldn't ask you to part with" them, I won't. However, if you maintain that you can't afford health insurance, then you likely qualify for a bunch of low-income stuff. Like health insurance. Since a lot of people think that's more important to have health insurance than something better than a ball-inna-cup (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYvzSo1bJHs) for entertainment, I would make getting health insurance a higher priority, especially since you can't pay out of pocket for any kind of medical expenses.
Killer_Man_
03-26-2010, 23:00
I actually was planning on getting insurance when I had you know, finished college or even got a better job.
I'm not saying video games or computer games are in that list for a budget. Hell, I've been mostly using gamefly to play the new games instead of buying them.
The last thing I bought I do believe that was even a game was Paper Mario on the VC.
I mostly have 30-60 dollars left that's just for me.
Gerrymander
03-27-2010, 00:37
I found some info about the individual mandate to put some of your fears at rest, KM.
Firstly, it doesn't actually come into effect until 2014, and the fining system won't be fully in place until 2016. That should give you a nice window of time for job-finding and college-finishing.
Secondly, if the minimum insurance plan would cost more than 8% of your monthly income, then you are off the hook. Plus at that point, you're getting tons of subsidies in order to make insurance far less costly.
Thirdly, it actually says in the bill that if you don't pay the fine, then you can't actually be punished for it.
‘(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES- In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
‘(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES- The Secretary shall not—
‘(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section, or
‘(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.’
So...there you go.
Killer_Man_
03-27-2010, 01:34
That does make me feel better.
SpaceProg
03-27-2010, 04:58
Yeah that crossed my mind when they said you'd be fined 2% or so of your income, I was like... okay let's suppose my income at the time was 0. 2% of 0 is...?
Gerrymander
03-27-2010, 05:01
Well, it's $695 or 2% of your income, whichever is higher.
But if you have an income of 0, then you're sitting pretty as far as that is concerned =)
chefTENGU
03-27-2010, 12:00
That's the thing. Usually when someone is complaining about Big Bad Government trying to crush all their dreams, they forget all the laws which exist to protect taxpayers and help them out.
Like all those tax advocacy commercials where they keep telling you that if the IRS is coming after you, then you better hire yourself a lawyer or get ready to eat cat food for the rest of your life. People forget that the IRS keeps a ton of lawyers on staff to help out taxpayers who have fun afoul of the agency and are paid to be impartial.
Bloodcinder
03-27-2010, 12:32
Guys....none of this [fine-related provision] is set in stone yet untill its voted on in the November elections.
Wrong. The statute has been signed by President Obama. It is now law. The fining provision goes into effect in 2014.
Wrong. The statute has been signed by President Obama. It is now law. The fining provision goes into effect in 2014.
What I what I understood from the newspaper I read in the Drs office was it its not concrete till its voted on......hummmmm...
SpaceProg
03-27-2010, 13:28
I thought that was what they just got through doing, hence why Obama has signed it into law.
Bloodcinder
03-27-2010, 13:37
The final vote was this past Sunday.
deathofcheese
03-27-2010, 15:09
Maybe they're saying that with major elections in November, there could be a bunch of politicians voted in that will serve as major opposition to the continued existence of the bill/law.
What about the rumors I've heard that there are a bunch of states planning on suing the government about passing the reform?
Bloodcinder
03-27-2010, 16:59
They are not rumors. A dozen states are currently suing.
chefTENGU
03-27-2010, 21:22
Last I heard it was 15, though the other 35 are already moving to comply with the legislation.
Of course, this was on CNN, so who knows.
Gerrymander
03-28-2010, 01:42
Section 1332 of the bill sets out rules for state waivers to the bill...so that states can basically do their own thing if they really want to - as long as the state's healthcare plan is as comprehensive and affordable as the current bill.
SpaceProg
03-28-2010, 02:43
So... are we gonna get to kill old people or not?
Seegtease
03-28-2010, 03:08
Only if they're smelly.
SpaceProg
03-28-2010, 04:17
... Meh... Okay, I'll grudgingly accept that.
deathofcheese
03-28-2010, 08:34
PLLEZE DONT DEATH PANEL MY AGED MOTHER BY SOCIALIZING HER MEDICARE!
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.