-
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
obamacare upheld by scotus
- Thread starter 5BrothersFabrication
- Start date
- Status
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
I agree we need more working class representatives. Since when is america represented by 99.9% lawyers ? Doesnt sound very representative to me. They are trying to limit giant insurance firms from doig exactly what you are saying by breeding competition and innovation. So that insurance companies compete for our business and we dont have to just pay blue cross blue shield because they are the only thing we can get no matter the cost. Competition is good but it usually leads to cheating and loophole abuse which is what got us here in the first place. We will see how it turns out. I dont know about the future but for te present this bill seems to address more issues than it causes.
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
Im lucky my company provides insurance for less than $30 a month full health/dental/vision
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
And if the government drives private insurance collectives out of business because they are charging less with better coverage that is a bad thing to pay less for your health? Canada has been doing it for 30 some odd years and have higher life expectancy, lower infant mortality, and 50% less cost to the insured than in America.
So what are you going to do when your company decides that it's cheaper to drop your insurance and just pay the penalty? Then by then
The prices are going to be through the roof because they have to take everyone with every problem and like I said they have to make money some how, so now it's going to probably be multiple times that if you have a family!!!I strongly urge you to start studying how the economy and business
Works for your self and think about tge effects all this is going to have!And I can promise you what they taught you in college about business doesn't work,I've owned my own for 7 years now and if I did what Tgey taught I would have been bankrupt when the economy crashed
The prices are going to be through the roof because they have to take everyone with every problem and like I said they have to make money some how, so now it's going to probably be multiple times that if you have a family!!!I strongly urge you to start studying how the economy and business
Works for your self and think about tge effects all this is going to have!And I can promise you what they taught you in college about business doesn't work,I've owned my own for 7 years now and if I did what Tgey taught I would have been bankrupt when the economy crashed
patooyee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,692
95limitedzj said:
I was w/a shitty BCBS plan b/c it was all I could afford. But when I tried to upgrade plans they wouldn't let me because of a preexisting condition. (One that I haven't been treated for in years.) Obamacare didn't address that. 2 weeks after Obamacare passed I received notice from BCBS that my premium was going up $200/mo. Nothing in my family's health had changed to cause this. How does Obamacare address that? The fact that you get basically free healthcare pisses me off b/c you speak as though you know something about it when you've never experienced the real world. I hope your employer drops that crap with the quickness now that Obamacare is going to make what they are paying skyrocket. I hope they leave you and your family out in the cold with the rest of us. I had to switch to Cigna to improve my plan, it cost me $545/mo for my daughter, wife, and I. That's just health. We pay another $145/mo for a separate dental plan to cover us all. I wish I could afford vision. And this plan is only marginally better than the BCBS plan. The plan I wish I could afford is over $1000/mo.
What about when dr's won't accept government plan patients b/c they pay so much less? When my neighbors are all complaining that the healthcare they get "taxed" yearly for less than I pay monthly doesn't treat them as well as my plan does? You think they / progressives aren't going to come for my **** then? Or yours? They're going to be screaming about dying babies and come take our **** with the quickness. Or what about when Medicaid, which is already one of our largest unfunded liabilities, is even bigger and less funded? Who is going to pay then?
That's the problem with democrats, liberals, and even some republicans. SHORT SIGHTED. I agree, everything looks like candy canes and bubble gum in the short-term with Obamacare. Unfortunately, I find myself tragically unable to be blissfully ignorant. I see 5-20 years from now where it looks like debt, bankruptcy, and riots on the streets.
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
I don't see where all this added cost is coming in if their company drops them. Those people were to be treated for the same illnesses so the medical bills would be the same except part of their bill will now be covered by the government from the funds taken as penalty for not covering them?
(Page 40, Sec. 2718 - Insurance companies need to make public how much they spend on insurance claims, and what they make in profits. Starting in 2011, if their costs (and risks, and overhead, etc.) is less than 80-85% of the money they make, they need to send rebates out to their customers. Basically, they're not allowed to do price-gouging to make obscene profits.)
Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down. ( Citation: Page 42, sec. 2719 )
The controversy was over the penalty for not engaging in an activity. The confusion began because of the term "mandate" instead of "incentive." All that's necessary to grok this opinion is to look at other activities that are given tax relief because the State wants to encourage them for one reason or another.
.
In other words: "Raise all taxes, give rebates for actions the gov't wants to encourage."
Examples of things for which we receive a tax break, but don't view as mandates:
Marriage
Child rearing
Home ownership
Donations to non-profits
TL
R Supreme Course effectively said gov't has power to raise all taxes, then offer tax breaks for X (purchasing insurance, in this case.)
(Page 40, Sec. 2718 - Insurance companies need to make public how much they spend on insurance claims, and what they make in profits. Starting in 2011, if their costs (and risks, and overhead, etc.) is less than 80-85% of the money they make, they need to send rebates out to their customers. Basically, they're not allowed to do price-gouging to make obscene profits.)
Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down. ( Citation: Page 42, sec. 2719 )
The controversy was over the penalty for not engaging in an activity. The confusion began because of the term "mandate" instead of "incentive." All that's necessary to grok this opinion is to look at other activities that are given tax relief because the State wants to encourage them for one reason or another.
.
In other words: "Raise all taxes, give rebates for actions the gov't wants to encourage."
Examples of things for which we receive a tax break, but don't view as mandates:
Marriage
Child rearing
Home ownership
Donations to non-profits
TL
R Supreme Course effectively said gov't has power to raise all taxes, then offer tax breaks for X (purchasing insurance, in this case.)95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
I think your situation will be improved in a few years when this is enacted based on what I've read (see below). Again I didn't write this **** but I did read it. These next few excerpts are about people who will struggle to pay for premiums and copay with their current living situations. I know we all want to know where this money is coming from. As do I. I know they are cutting Medicare by 500B or so.
(In 2003, George W. Bush signed "Medicare Part D" into law, it was the Medicare prescription drug benefit plus a program called "Medicare Advantage," which allowed seniors to use their Medicare funds to buy insurance on the private market. By 2009, it was clear that Medicare Advantage was a failure--the government was losing money by letting people buy private insurance. What the Affordable Care Act does is end Medicare Advantage--saving $500 billion--and plows some of that money into expanding Medicaid, and providing subsidies for people who can't afford health insurance.)
Page 129, Sec. 36B - Starting in 2014, gives a refundable tax credit to everyone who makes too much to qualify for Medicaid, but makes less than 400% of the poverty line (which, again, is based on your age and how many people are in your household). Depending on how much you make, this could save you up to $10,000 a year. A refundable tax credit is basically a discount on your taxes, and if it's more money than you pay in taxes, you actually get the extra money back as a refund. This is the bill's answer to the question "How will I afford insurance if I make too much to qualify for Medicare, but not enough to afford insurance on my own?".
Page 138, Sec. 1402 - If I'm reading this right, insurers must reduce costs (both co-pays and overall costs) for everyone who makes too much to qualify for Medicaid, but makes less than 400% of the poverty line (which, like I said last time, is based on your age and how many people are in your household). Depending on how much you make, your co-pay costs could be slashed by up to two-thirds the normal price, and your overall costs could be covered up to 94%. If you're an Indian (presumably Native American Indian) making under 300% of the poverty line, you have no co-pay. This section specifically says it only applies to citizens and legal aliens living in the US (so no illegal aliens allowed)
And I have never personally lived in Canada I just go with the stats that I have and they are pretty much summed up on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States
Also the denial for previous conditions you have talked about above are all well before anything in Obamacare goes into effect. Full Prexisting condition coverage will not be in place until 2014. Most will be 2013. It was at the discretion of the companies how much they charge you.
NOW:
It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them. ( Citation: Page 30, sec. 1101, Page 45, sec. 2704, and Page 46, sec. 2702 )
1/1/2014:
This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.
No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history. ( Citation: Page 45, sec. 2704, Page 46, sec. 2701, and Page 57, sec. 1255 )
If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it. (Note: On 6/28/12, the Supreme Court ruled that this is Constitutional, as long as it's considered a tax on the uninsured and not a penalty for not buying insurance... nitpicking about wording, mostly, but the long and short of it is, it looks like this is accepted by the courts) ( Citation: Page 145, sec. 5000A, and here is the actual court ruling for those who wish to read it. )
(In 2003, George W. Bush signed "Medicare Part D" into law, it was the Medicare prescription drug benefit plus a program called "Medicare Advantage," which allowed seniors to use their Medicare funds to buy insurance on the private market. By 2009, it was clear that Medicare Advantage was a failure--the government was losing money by letting people buy private insurance. What the Affordable Care Act does is end Medicare Advantage--saving $500 billion--and plows some of that money into expanding Medicaid, and providing subsidies for people who can't afford health insurance.)
Page 129, Sec. 36B - Starting in 2014, gives a refundable tax credit to everyone who makes too much to qualify for Medicaid, but makes less than 400% of the poverty line (which, again, is based on your age and how many people are in your household). Depending on how much you make, this could save you up to $10,000 a year. A refundable tax credit is basically a discount on your taxes, and if it's more money than you pay in taxes, you actually get the extra money back as a refund. This is the bill's answer to the question "How will I afford insurance if I make too much to qualify for Medicare, but not enough to afford insurance on my own?".
Page 138, Sec. 1402 - If I'm reading this right, insurers must reduce costs (both co-pays and overall costs) for everyone who makes too much to qualify for Medicaid, but makes less than 400% of the poverty line (which, like I said last time, is based on your age and how many people are in your household). Depending on how much you make, your co-pay costs could be slashed by up to two-thirds the normal price, and your overall costs could be covered up to 94%. If you're an Indian (presumably Native American Indian) making under 300% of the poverty line, you have no co-pay. This section specifically says it only applies to citizens and legal aliens living in the US (so no illegal aliens allowed)
And I have never personally lived in Canada I just go with the stats that I have and they are pretty much summed up on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States
Also the denial for previous conditions you have talked about above are all well before anything in Obamacare goes into effect. Full Prexisting condition coverage will not be in place until 2014. Most will be 2013. It was at the discretion of the companies how much they charge you.
NOW:
It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them. ( Citation: Page 30, sec. 1101, Page 45, sec. 2704, and Page 46, sec. 2702 )
1/1/2014:
This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.
No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history. ( Citation: Page 45, sec. 2704, Page 46, sec. 2701, and Page 57, sec. 1255 )
If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it. (Note: On 6/28/12, the Supreme Court ruled that this is Constitutional, as long as it's considered a tax on the uninsured and not a penalty for not buying insurance... nitpicking about wording, mostly, but the long and short of it is, it looks like this is accepted by the courts) ( Citation: Page 145, sec. 5000A, and here is the actual court ruling for those who wish to read it. )
I have lots of Canadian friends. They will tell you that the health care in Canada doesn't work. If they need medical attention in a reasonable time they come to the states for it. Government has yet to show me it can efficient at anything it does.
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
I have a coworker who couldn't get "emergency" back surgery in America for 3 months so he went to Korea (South) and had it done the next day. First hand accounts are all over the place. As a whole I believe our system is not as good as theirs.
TBItoy
Well-Known Member
SilverStarCustoms said:
All the people we goose hunt with around Regina and Naicam,SK do the same (come to the states for healthcare)
TBItoy
Well-Known Member
95limitedzj said:
What you meant to say is that your co worker found out it was cheaper to fly to s Korea and get the surgery than go somewhere else in the states and get it done. I'd never believe that if someone wanted to get a necessary surgery in the USA that they couldn't find ANYWHERE in the Entire country that could do it on short notice.
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your intuitive and thought provoking argument. I know the economy sucks. We don't produce **** anymore. China owns more of us than anyone cares to know about. We print money endlessly that has debt already attached to it from day 1 because we have a "Federal" Reserve that is privately owned. So there isn't enough money in the world to get out of debt, ever. Everyone is out for the almighty $, has no morals or ethical code. This thread is about "Obamacare" or the bastardized version of it that we are now going to live with. If people cared more about this economy you talk about and less about American Idol, Jersey Shore, Reality TV bullshit and became a tiny bit more educated they would see that this world is not 1960's America, **** is ****ed up now. We pay people 100x more to pass a ball around on TV than to educate our children. Why does that not seem ridiculous to us? We had it easy because our forefathers busted their asses for us, but it isn't going to be a free ride forever. 1 man cannot change this country it will take all 310+ million of us to realize we all need to change and do something about it...
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
He has dual citizenship, and his American insurance company doesn't pay for you to go to any doctor you want in the country on a whim? Or if they do I'd like to know what insurance company that is. Most companyies have approved places you can go called "In-Network" , If they don't have an opening for a new patient to have a major surgery for a month then you are SOL. The "emergency" was in quotations because it was a slipped disk, keeping him out of work and off his feet. It was not life threatening. I would hope a life threatening surgery could be performed rather quickly in "The greatest country in the world"
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
Dual Citizenship as in he works for a Korean company stationed in America, and has to be here longer than his 3 year visa will allow. Are you hating on legal immigrants? He moved here away from his home to make a better life for his family. Sounds like some other people I know from a few hundred years ago...
95limitedzj
Well-Known Member
Last little tidbit towards the end of the bill for all of you who hate it so much.
1/1/2017
If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers). ( Citation: Page 98, sec. 1332 )
If you don't like it, call your representative. You have that power. This is America..
1/1/2017
If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers). ( Citation: Page 98, sec. 1332 )
If you don't like it, call your representative. You have that power. This is America..
patooyee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,692
95limitedzj said:
See the problem? My gripe was only partially about BCBS's policies about my preexisting conditions. The free market allowed me to leave BCBS and go to Cigna to deal with that. (It probably would have been more affordable to do so had I been able to shop out of state.) But Obamacare did cause my premium increase. That was nothing more than BCBS's way of charging me for all the unfunded liabilities that Obama's bill forces them to take on now and in the future. (Because they are able to see beyond the candy canes and bubblegum also.)
- Status
