America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

You don't seriously think the health care reform bill will lower the deficit do you? I know that the CBO has projected it would do so (over the first 10 years), but we all know the history of government cost estimates.

In a roundabout way, yes. The big issue here was to get over the hump with the first major effort to reform the system with cost in mind (and coverage being the other). Once that effort is completed, its going to be easier for subsequent administrations to continue to squeeze all players into easing the costs. The main problem was getting everybody in line the first time to take a big initial step.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

In a roundabout way, yes. The big issue here was to get over the hump with the first major effort to reform the system with cost in mind (and coverage being the other). Once that effort is completed, its going to be easier for subsequent administrations to continue to squeeze all players into easing the costs. The main problem was getting everybody in line the first time to take a big initial step.

He says, looking into the abyss...

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

In a roundabout way, yes. The big issue here was to get over the hump with the first major effort to reform the system with cost in mind (and coverage being the other). Once that effort is completed, its going to be easier for subsequent administrations to continue to squeeze all players into easing the costs. The main problem was getting everybody in line the first time to take a big initial step.

The biggest step was Medicare. I suspect it's a lot more complicated than this, because otherwise Medicare would have morphed into universal coverage. It's had 45 years.

My point is that it will always be hard to expand public health insurance, because there will always be extremely strong and well-financed opposition by the insurance companies protecting their rice bowls. It will always be cost effective for them to argue "this is a step towards government control of health care," funnel millions to their media shills to stoke the flames, and get the angry mobs out to scare the politicians.

Don't kid yourself -- whenever money is involved, every additional step is tough and the opposition becomes more and more shameless.

 

[ScottM]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

However, the notion that the GOP is returning to power on this is laughable. In case you haven't noticed, people don't like the GOP.

I'd generally agree with you on the GOP taking either chamber in 2010, but people in this country have strong history of voting against people rather than for them. If things worsen, or are perceived to be worse, the Dems could get bloodied in 2010 and 2012.

 

[moe24]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

I'd generally agree with you on the GOP taking either chamber in 2010, but people in this country have strong history of voting against people rather than for them. If things worsen, or are perceived to be worse, the Dems could get bloodied in 2010 and 2012.

Quoted for truth.

Heck, most conservatives don't like the GOP right now. But people don't vote for what they want, they vote against what they don't want.

 

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

The biggest step was Medicare. I suspect it's a lot more complicated than this, because otherwise Medicare would have morphed into universal coverage. It's had 45 years.

My point is that it will always be hard to expand public health insurance, because there will always be extremely strong and well-financed opposition by the insurance companies protecting their rice bowls. It will always be cost effective for them to argue "this is a step towards government control of health care," funnel millions to their media shills to stoke the flames, and get the angry mobs out to scare the politicians.

Don't kid yourself -- whenever money is involved, every additional step is tough and the opposition becomes more and more shameless.

The opposition couldn't get any more shameless if it tried. This is indeed Waterloo as they say, but its their Waterloo, not Obama's. Once people aren't being offed by secret panels, nor a public insurance option hasn't run all private industry out of business, what arguments are left?

This whole anti-health care reform reminds me of the effort to ban smoking in public during the decade. In that case, it was the myth that prevented this from being enacted even though a vast majority of people approved of the action. The myth there was that all bars and restaurants would go out of business. Didn't happen, and good luck trying to convince people to go back to the old way.

Same thing here. Once enacted and fear mongering is embarassingly disproven, you can expect a somewhat easier path to tinkering with the system as needed.

 

[Bill]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

This whole anti-health care reform reminds me of the effort to ban smoking in public during the decade.

It isn't an anti-health care reform issue and you know it. Pretty much everyone agrees that health care reform is needed. A lot of people don't want the Fed government trying to take over the whole health care system. It doesn't exactly have a good track record of being able to run programs in an efficient and cost effective manor.

 

[Slap Shot]

Too soon as they have, IMO, rushed this bill through committee without anybody who votes really taking a close look at it.

Person A: I want health reform!
Person B: OK, what type of reform?
A: This type (shows bill).
B: Can I look at this and let you know?
A: We need reform right now! Vote on it!
B: Wait a minute, this is over 1,000 pages. I need to read this.
A: Vote!
B: OK. I vote No.

Very simplified, but I hope you get the idea.

I do and for once you are spot on!

 

[leswp1]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

It isn't an anti-health care reform issue and you know it. Pretty much everyone agrees that health care reform is needed. A lot of people don't want the Fed government trying to take over the whole health care system. It doesn't exactly have a good track record of being able to run programs in an efficient and cost effective manor.

Haven't been following closely so maybe this has been answered- I keep seeing all this stuff about how gov't can't do it right and about how it is needed. What do you think should be in the reform of healthcare bill?

 

[Bill]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Haven't been following closely so maybe this has been answered- I keep seeing all this stuff about how gov't can't do it right and about how it is needed. What do you think should be in the reform of healthcare bill?

Things like:

Getting rid of mandates; allow more of an a la cart system where you can pick and choose what coverage you want and aren't forced to have coverage for things that will likely never apply to your situation.

We need a much better electronic record keeping system. It shouldn't be "that" difficult in the computer age.

Allow purchase of health insurance across state lines.

Tax credits to make insurance more affordable to low income families/ individuals.

Tort reform.

Regulations to get the drug companies out of bed with Congress. Same for the insurance companies to a lesser extent.

Incentives for encouraging more people to go into the physician and nursing professions.

Exempt health insurance premiums from taxation. i.e. Subtract them from your gross income prior to application of income taxes.

 

[moe24]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Exempt health insurance premiums from taxation. i.e. Subtract them from your gross income prior to application of income taxes.

Isn't this already the case? Or does it only apply to non-profit employees? My wife, a private school teacher, has her share of our health insurance premiums deducted from her paycheck pre-tax.

 

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Getting rid of mandates; allow more of an a la cart system where you can pick and choose what coverage you want and aren't forced to have coverage for things that will likely never apply to your situation.

Dumb. Some preventative mandates are good policy. Once a year physical, mammograms, etc. Make it "pick and choose" and two things will happen: cheap/reckless people will still not get the care they should and then end up in worse condition thus leaving the rest of us with the bill, or insurance companies will put the screws to anybody who thinks they need a procedure ahead of time.

Tax credits to make insurance more affordable to low income families/ individuals.

Why not just expand Medicaid coverage instead for the low income people?

Allow purchase of health insurance across state lines.

Tort reform.

Right wing talking points that studies show do little or nothing to address health care costs. Kindly give us an estimate of how much actual savings we'd get, and what tort reform would look like.

Incentives for encouraging more people to go into the physician and nursing professions.

Govt stepping into private sector? Okay.

Regulations to get the drug companies out of bed with Congress. Same for the insurance companies to a lesser extent.

Which is why you should like that this bill has 250Bn in savings from these two industries.

Exempt health insurance premiums from taxation. i.e. Subtract them from your gross income prior to application of income taxes.

Umm....that already happens.

 

[ScottM]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Isn't this already the case? Or does it only apply to non-profit employees? My wife, a private school teacher, has her share of our health insurance premiums deducted from her paycheck pre-tax.

I thought that was the case right now for most employee health plans and I think it is with mine. Moreover, company paid premiums are tax deductible which, probably, creates alot of market distortions. I'd rather see companies do away with company-paid plans, and allow/require employees to find their own with some form of subsidy or tax benefit for paying premiums. If you want true "competition" in the marketplace, take out the middleman, e.g., employer-provided plans.

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Isn't this already the case? Or does it only apply to non-profit employees? My wife, a private school teacher, has her share of our health insurance premiums deducted from her paycheck pre-tax.

You're correct. An employer can deduct health premiums pre-tax. I'm curious to see what the threshold is where "premium policies" will get taxed - IIRC, the taxable amount is supposed to be calculated on not just the employee's contribution, but on the entire policy value. So a good "premium family policy" that will cost $15k will run the person $4,200 in taxes at 28%.

If anyone has any specifics on that part of it and can mine them out of this quagmire of legislation and post, that'd be helpful.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

You're correct. An employer can deduct health premiums pre-tax. I'm curious to see what the threshold is where "premium policies" will get taxed - IIRC, the taxable amount is supposed to be calculated on not just the employee's contribution, but on the entire policy value. So a good "premium family policy" that will cost $15k will run the person $4,200 in taxes at 28%.

If anyone has any specifics on that part of it and can mine them out of this quagmire of legislation and post, that'd be helpful.

Better we completely ignore the fact that the private sector has failed us yet again.

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

I thought that was the case right now for most employee health plans and I think it is with mine. Moreover, company paid premiums are tax deductible which, probably, creates alot of market distortions. I'd rather see companies do away with company-paid plans, and allow/require employees to find their own with some form of subsidy or tax benefit for paying premiums. If you want true "competition" in the marketplace, take out the middleman, e.g., employer-provided plans.

...but...*right now*, the cost benefits are better when you purchase through a group (company). The more employees I put on any given plan with any insurer I know of, the cost per family/couple/individual goes way down. Much cheaper per policy to purchase through a company (group) than buying an individual plan. I've never seen a company charge for making group coverage available to their employees unless they self-insure all or part of a plan.

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Better we completely ignore the fact that the private sector has failed us yet again.

Move to China. The rest of us will work on the issues at hand.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

I thought that was the case right now for most employee health plans and I think it is with mine. Moreover, company paid premiums are tax deductible which, probably, creates alot of market distortions. I'd rather see companies do away with company-paid plans, and allow/require employees to find their own with some form of subsidy or tax benefit for paying premiums. If you want true "competition" in the marketplace, take out the middleman, e.g., employer-provided plans.

I couldn't agree more. The insurance companies play this false game where "groups" are created through company plans. The group should be the entire available insurance client pool, just like it is for car insurance, etc.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Move to China. The rest of us will work on the issues at hand.

Yeah, like you'll have a positive impact on Health Care in the US. When you run for office let me know.

 

[moe24]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

...but...*right now*, the cost benefits are better when you purchase through a group (company). The more employees I put on any given plan with any insurer I know of, the cost per family/couple/individual goes way down. Much cheaper per policy to purchase through a company (group) than buying an individual plan. I've never seen a company charge for making group coverage available to their employees unless they self-insure all or part of a plan.

And this hits on one of the systemic problems in our health care system that isn't being addressed.