|
Replies: 25
| visibility 432
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 3:25 PM
|
|
I cannot speak for the whole 2700 pages but I do not like the following:
1.) the bit about forcing insurance companies to include kids up to 26 years....why not just let them offer this at a price if they choose to?
2.) Employer plans now are going to be one size fits all. Why not let the employer offer what they like and let the employee respond as he or she would with cash payments? My company offers several plans which most companies do and I choose the one that best fits my situation. Now all plans will be pretty much all inclusive.
3.) Why did this bill not make insurance plans available across state lines? Wouldn't this alone have solved much of the problem of certain independent workers not being able to join "groups" that are necessary to spread the risks across a large enough population to get the price down?
4.) - The benefits of using HSA's will be reduced: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/04/27/how-obamacare-will-make-health-savings-accounts-more-costly/
5.) The bit about being able to sign up for insurance after getting sick is a crock unless that person has to pay their individual cost of coverage but my understanding is that they will not. Therefore, why even carry insurance?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/03/22/how-obamacare-dramatically-increases-the-cost-of-insurance-for-young-workers/
Congrats boys, this is just great.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33600
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 3:33 PM
|
|
1.) the bit about forcing insurance companies to include kids up to 26 years....why not just let them offer this at a price if they choose to?
That's the rule right now. They choose not to. Obviously giving them a choice does not have the desired effect.
2.) Employer plans now are going to be one size fits all. Why not let the employer offer what they like and let the employee respond as he or she would with cash payments? My company offers several plans which most companies do and I choose the one that best fits my situation. Now all plans will be pretty much all inclusive.
I don't know what one-size-fits-all means. Are you saying that there won't be HMOs and PPOs and so on, the way there are now? If so, that's news to me.
3.) Why did this bill not make insurance plans available across state lines? Wouldn't this alone have solved much of the problem of certain independent workers not being able to join "groups" that are necessary to spread the risks across a large enough population to get the price down?
Making insurance plans available across state lines is every bit as intrusive on states' rights as Barrycare. It would result in a race to the bottom, with every Delaware (or whichever state is most insurer-friendly) company edging out every other state's company, and preventing states from creating their own policies.
4.) - The benefits of using HSA's will be reduced: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/04/27/how-obamacare-will-make-health-savings-accounts-more-costly/
HSAs are federally funded programs as well, so I would think reducing one of the programs would be considered a good thing. Kinda like when we learned that Medicare might take a hit. Good deal: Unlike Barrycare, Medicare is real live socialized healthcare.
5.) The bit about being able to sign up for insurance after getting sick is a crock unless that person has to pay their individual cost of coverage but my understanding is that they will not. Therefore, why even carry insurance?
That's why there's an individual mandate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24440]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26120
Joined: 9/9/03
|
consider mike and joe: mike is 28 and in good shape. he
Jun 28, 2012, 3:42 PM
|
|
doesn't smoke, own a motorcycle or eat red meat. joe is 52, 80 pounds overweight and a smoker. would they both be entitled to purchase the same insurance plan from the same carrier for the same price? this is an honest question. under obamacare, i presume the answer to be yes. if so, then their risk on joe is much higher than on mike. in fact, they are likely to lose money on joe. so wouldn't they just increase the cost of the plan across the board and charge them both more?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5725
Joined: 12/27/05
|
If there are more people in the pool
Jun 28, 2012, 4:07 PM
|
|
Then the risk is offset. That's one of the huge premises behind this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [366]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 407
Joined: 1/14/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24440]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26120
Joined: 9/9/03
|
i don't think they'll have profits now. they're being forced
Jun 28, 2012, 8:04 PM
|
|
to make bad business deals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 3:49 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why do you not like Obamacare? ] |
|
1.) the bit about forcing insurance companies to include kids up to 26 years....why not just let them offer this at a price if they choose to?
That's the rule right now. They choose not to. Obviously giving them a choice does not have the desired effect.
(Let them go out and buy the coverage just like everyone else. Are you saying they cannot buy coverage?)
2.) Employer plans now are going to be one size fits all. Why not let the employer offer what they like and let the employee respond as he or she would with cash payments? My company offers several plans which most companies do and I choose the one that best fits my situation. Now all plans will be pretty much all inclusive.
I don't know what one-size-fits-all means. Are you saying that there won't be HMOs and PPOs and so on, the way there are now? If so, that's news to me.
(my understanding is that the maximums and what is covered is dictated by the government- why is this necessary? Is it because the Demos think they need to set the specs of the contracts that are freely entered into by both parties?)
3.) Why did this bill not make insurance plans available across state lines? Wouldn't this alone have solved much of the problem of certain independent workers not being able to join "groups" that are necessary to spread the risks across a large enough population to get the price down?
Making insurance plans available across state lines is every bit as intrusive on states' rights as Barrycare. It would result in a race to the bottom, with every Delaware (or whichever state is most insurer-friendly) company edging out every other state's company, and preventing states from creating their own policies.
(I don't understand this legally but it seems as if you are saying that the U.S. is not really a free trade zone. Does Ford have 50 corporate charters in order to operate in allthe states?)
4.) - The benefits of using HSA's will be reduced: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/04/27/how-obamacare-will-make-health-savings-accounts-more-costly/
HSAs are federally funded programs as well, so I would think reducing one of the programs would be considered a good thing. Kinda like when we learned that Medicare might take a hit. Good deal: Unlike Barrycare, Medicare is real live socialized healthcare.
(they are not "funded" by the Feds but they get a tax break - I guess I'm fine with eliminating them as long as all the other deductions are eliminated )
5.) The bit about being able to sign up for insurance after getting sick is a crock unless that person has to pay their individual cost of coverage but my understanding is that they will not. Therefore, why even carry insurance?
That's why there's an individual mandate.
(Isn't that minimum individual mandate payment quite small? Pay that minimum then go get that quadrupal bypass. Of course, Medicade is free and this ramps up the maximum income at which people can apply for medicaid)
Is there an asset test for Medicaid or just income?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5725
Joined: 12/27/05
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 4:17 PM
|
|
> (Let them go out and buy the coverage just like
> everyone else. Are you saying they cannot buy
> coverage?)
Correct, children can, and do get denied coverage for any number of stupid reasons. There are horror stories about families having to apply to scores of difference insurance companies for EACH individual, because of denials. In one article I read, all four family members were insured under different companies.
> (my understanding is that the maximums and what is
> covered is dictated by the government- why is this
> necessary? Is it because the Demos think they need
> to set the specs of the contracts that are freely
> entered into by both parties?)
It doesn't sound like you really have any idea, since you're clearly speculating. Nice partisan jab, there, too.
> (Isn't that minimum individual mandate payment quite
> small? Pay that minimum then go get that quadrupal
> bypass. Of course, Medicade is free and this ramps
> up the maximum income at which people can apply for
> medicaid)
I never cease to be saddened at how batsh*t insane some people get over the idea of paying into universal healthcare so that the sum of the whole (America) is better for it, especially if it really does end up being cheaper. If it does indeed drive down our costs overall, we should all be thrilled that more Americans also get better care. If the costs don't end up going down, then yes, there needs to be blood, because the insurance companies get a lot more bodies in the pool now.
I work for a tiny company that can't afford group insurance. We are struggling every day just to survive. If I really can no longer be denied coverage, or gouged as badly for whatever menial red mark on my health record I'll eventually earn, then this is a big win for the little guys.
But do pull your head out of your partisan a$ses, people. This is a positive step. It doesn't fix everything, but let's see how things go before going all armchair economist on TigerNet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 4:25 PM
|
|
I love the part where you admit that you want something for nothing.....thanks for that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8142]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19775
Joined: 6/6/03
|
I missed that part.***
Jun 28, 2012, 4:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Re: I missed that part.***
Jun 28, 2012, 5:13 PM
|
|
"If I really can no longer be denied coverage, or gouged as badly for whatever menial red mark on my health record I'll eventually earn, then this is a big win for the little guys."
I do not mind socializing health insurance risk through private pools of individuals but I do not want to be taxed so that I can pay for this person's insurance which is controlled in substance by the government. If the barriers to forming pools are/were removed, these risks would be distributed willingly through the private market. Name one thing the govt. does efficiently (including run Clemson).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5725
Joined: 12/27/05
|
Try un-crossing your eyes and reading that again
Jun 28, 2012, 4:29 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why do you not like Obamacare? ] |
|
I pay way more in healthcare than most on here, being on private insurance. I'm definitely a burden on society!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33600
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 5:15 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why do you not like Obamacare? ] |
|
I can answer all of those issues over time, but at the moment I can't, so I'm picking one. Please feel free to re-raise the others in the future.
(Lumbee quotes in italics)
3.) Why did this bill not make insurance plans available across state lines? Wouldn't this alone have solved much of the problem of certain independent workers not being able to join "groups" that are necessary to spread the risks across a large enough population to get the price down?Making insurance plans available across state lines is every bit as intrusive on states' rights as Barrycare. It would result in a race to the bottom, with every Delaware (or whichever state is most insurer-friendly) company edging out every other state's company, and preventing states from creating their own policies.
(I don't understand this legally but it seems as if you are saying that the U.S. is not really a free trade zone. Does Ford have 50 corporate charters in order to operate in allthe states?) Legally what we're talking about is a state's ability to regulate commerce, contracts, the market, and so on. States have general police power, which is far more power than the federal government. I don't know what a "free trade zone" means to you, but states have all kinds of laws regulating trade. For instance, many states have franchise laws and car dealership laws that limit a franchisor's or car manufacturer's bargaining power over franchisees. What this means for national car manufacturers, like Ford, is that they have to be in compliance with the laws of whatever states they do business in, even if that means complying with 50 different sets of laws. That's the point of our federal system: to give each state the opportunity to set their own systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [32958]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 53106
Joined: 3/5/02
|
Jawja, ever the bastion of liberal thought and glory
Jun 28, 2012, 5:23 PM
|
|
has passed a law allowing any insurance company, licensed in the state, to offer products that they sell in other states. Thus far - no takers. Whether the ruling today changes that, we'll see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 5:59 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why do you not like Obamacare? ] |
|
Gotcha- This explains all the crazy state gasoline laws that result in needless price spikes because of all the various grades in different locations.
Could states negotiate terms so that they could band together for the purposes of allowing these products to be sold across state lines? from Snuffy's post below it seems like Georgia is trying to get this going.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33600
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 29, 2012, 10:33 AM
|
|
Yes, states do collaborate on uniform laws in many contexts. Which is great. But we must recall that the purpose of our federalist system is to allow states to try different things without intervention by other states or the feds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8142]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19775
Joined: 6/6/03
|
OK, my main objections are that it lacks creativity...
Jun 28, 2012, 4:09 PM
|
|
... and therefore a sound business plan, expanding already overburdened programs, particularly Medicaid, provides no remedies for the looming Medicare problem, while complicating things even more than they are now, with little positive affect.
But as to your first point, did some insurance exec actually tell you that their companies were going to lose money by being "forced" to carry young people through age 26 on family policies? Because if he did, he was pulling your leg. Large risk pool clients who pay premiums but rarely even go to the doctor make them drool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [32958]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 53106
Joined: 3/5/02
|
Excellent point.***
Jun 28, 2012, 4:25 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [32958]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 53106
Joined: 3/5/02
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 4:32 PM
|
|
Biggest reason - there's so much crap in there I don't even know what I may like or not like, and it's way too complicated to begin to do a comprehensive anlysis of its real economic impacts.
Not particularly happy with yet more expansion of federal control of our lives, but I do see it as the natural evolution of the American Republic.
But the one real kicker is the asinine, hodge podge tax bites that will pay for it. A single tax would have allowed for a more transparent measure of cost, as well as who was paying for it.
Oh, and what Kilgore said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5725
Joined: 12/27/05
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 28, 2012, 4:48 PM
|
|
It is definitely overly complicated. I think that may be part of all of the uncertainty around it. Who knows what's going to happen, because it's hard as hell to fit the whole thing in your head at one time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80116
Joined: 11/29/99
|
I like it. The individual mandate will lower costs.
Jun 28, 2012, 6:02 PM
|
|
Insurance companies like the indiv mandate (more $) but dislike the preexisting conditions mandate.
I do think it creates problems for small businesses. I think public health care would help small businesses.
How much $ would a public option save a company with 50 employees? $200,000 a year?
Corporate tax prolly go up to pay for though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
It's not universal healthcare.***
Jun 28, 2012, 7:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: It's not universal healthcare.***
Jun 28, 2012, 7:18 PM
|
|
agree!! it is more universal socialism!! more take from those that earned it and give to those that refuse to earn anything
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [161]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 409
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [264]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 224
Joined: 1/10/11
|
Re: what is the min coverage required to not break the law?***
Jun 28, 2012, 8:46 PM
|
|
Here's why I don't like it:
1) This has set precedence that congress can impose any kind of tax onto any citizen anyway they see fit and the only remedy to prevent such tax is through election. So maybe Chevy goes into the tube again, and congress wants to find a way to save Chevy so they create a "tax credit" to anyone owning a chevy. Or since I smoke I will have to pay more on taxes since they will try to get more money since it costs more than they think etc etc.
2) Just another step towards socialism, the president said it himself "When people are sick and uninsured it is our responsibility to take care of them" as nice and geniune as that sounds the government shouldn't force people who take care of their bodies, or work hard and make good choices in life pay and subsidize those that didn't make good choices in life. Those decisions should to support the uninsured should come from the individuals not the government.
3) Lastly, since we are now officially over the 50% mark of americans receiving some sort of government assistance we have now become a nanny state and when people depend on an entity such as the government to provide assistance and care and money to them, the government can also take it away (bankruptcy) or can ask more from the citizens in order to get their dependecy checks or subsidies (conformity) scary thought if USA goes bankrupt....over 150 million people will be screaming for their money and it won't come.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 275
Joined: 1/9/12
|
Re: Why do you not like Obamacare?
Jun 29, 2012, 11:09 AM
|
|
At least it has us talking and bringing awareness to our health care system. I always look at both sides and form my own opinion. I would think that we would all like the part of personal responsibility. The Affordable Care Act has things I agree and disagree with. But it's a start. Some say repeal and replace. I worry that there will only be repeal. What is the replace? Why not tweak what's there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 25
| visibility 432
|
|
|
50
