The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

[Rover]

You mean like the employees of Walgreens who are similarly being subsidized by their employer? Which you posted literally one day before you first brought up this talking point?

I'll take old pio's acerbic nature over your disingenuity any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

The best part is The Boner got busted writing e-mails saying he wanted to preserve the ability of the feds to help staff pay for health care! Give Fishy a break. His ideology is once again being used as toilet paper and he expected riots in the streets when Obamacare went live. Ol' fishbreath hasn't had a good week this week.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So essentially the entire country, then. Between Medicare, social security, Medicaid, mortgage interest deduction, student loan subsidies and forgiveness, research grants, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, and traditional welfare, pretty much everyone's on the dole in one form or another.

I'm not. Not yet, anyway.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So essentially the entire country, then. Between Medicare, social security, Medicaid, mortgage interest deduction, student loan subsidies and forgiveness, research grants, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, and traditional welfare, pretty much everyone's on the dole in one form or another.

Close to it, yeah. Although I'd debate the mortgage interest deduction as it's a tax deduction, not a transfer payment or grant. And your list goes to show just how insidious it all is. There are majore economic impacts to all of these things because of government involvement and yet it's not really needed. Even the mortgage deduction impacts mortgage rates, acting as a price support for mortgage companies, so they can charge higher rates because people know they'll get some of their money back when filing taxes.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

"Travesty" is your word, not mine. That seems a bit hyperbolic. and how does it become "my" definition? I didn't write the law.

Generally, insurance pricing is proportionate to risk. The concept is to pool risk so that each person puts up a relatively small, known amount in exchange for the prospect of receiving a large sum if certain adverse events occur. When you pool risk, you typically pool together people with similar risk profiles.

The law is written so that young healthy people are asked to pay more than what their risk profile warrants. It is also written so that older, sicker people are asked to pay less than what their risk profile warrants. The excess of the former is supposed to cover the shortfall of the latter.

All of this is well-known and widely reported. It has nothing to do with me.

There is a far better way to accomplish the desired ends.

If by well known and widely reported you actually mean not what happens in real life then sure. For people who pay for their insurance (not uninsured or on a government program) about 80% of them get it through their employer. Employer provided insurance does not pool people together based on their risk profile, period. So the law is written to match the current practice that most of us already use. So how is this a big deal now?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

I'm not. Not yet, anyway.

You hold no mortgage? You've never attended a university? (unless you went to that school in western MI [Hillman?] that refuses all government money)? Your children haven't gone to college or public K-12 schools?

 

[walrus]

Those poor, poor, poor rich people, who have to pay a little more to fund healthcare. I almost missed the story where they gave away all their money and became homeless in order to beat the new taxes.

Wish someone would have told me before that I was rich, I wouldn't have to work

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

You hold no mortgage? You've never attended a university? (unless you went to that school in western MI [Hillman?] that refuses all government money)? Your children haven't gone to college or public K-12 schools?

Bet he's driven on an interstate - probably to a National Park, too.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

You hold no mortgage? You've never attended a university? (unless you went to that school in western MI [Hillman?] that refuses all government money)? Your children haven't gone to college or public K-12 schools?

Funny. I figured I've paid for all that stuff with my tax dollars. I guess that's the difference between liberals and conservatives.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Funny. I figured I've paid for all that stuff with my tax dollars. I guess that's the difference between liberals and conservatives.

You would need to earn an exceptional income to have your personal taxes pay for all of your childrens' educations, the tax payer portion of your college degree, and every other service that's publicly funded that you've received throughout your life.

ETA: And with the Federal government borrowing 40% of all it spends, your taxes are nowhere near paying for all the services you consume. And the same could be said for a number of state and local governments, too.

 

[unofan]

Close to it, yeah. Although I'd debate the mortgage interest deduction as it's a tax deduction, not a transfer payment or grant. And your list goes to show just how insidious it all is. There are majore economic impacts to all of these things because of government involvement and yet it's not really needed. Even the mortgage deduction impacts mortgage rates, acting as a price support for mortgage companies, so they can charge higher rates because people know they'll get some of their money back when filing taxes.

It also encourages home ownership, which has positive benefits to communities that can't always be quantified.

 

[Rover]

Close to it, yeah. Although I'd debate the mortgage interest deduction as it's a tax deduction, not a transfer payment or grant. And your list goes to show just how insidious it all is. There are majore economic impacts to all of these things because of government involvement and yet it's not really needed. Even the mortgage deduction impacts mortgage rates, acting as a price support for mortgage companies, so they can charge higher rates because people know they'll get some of their money back when filing taxes.

I always say conservatives should run on a platform of eliminating Social Security and Medicare. Let the voters decide! Any takers? Mr Paul...Mr Cruz...anybody?

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

You would need to earn an exceptional income to have your personal taxes pay for all of your childrens' educations, the tax payer portion of your college degree, and every other service that's publicly funded that you've received throughout your life.

ETA: And with the Federal government borrowing 40% of all it spends, your taxes are nowhere near paying for all the services you consume. And the same could be said for a number of state and local governments, too.

It borrows 40%, and an additional 36% (60% of the 60% it collects) comes from taxpayers making more than $160K per year. Which is to say that the contributions from us "normal folk" only cover about 24% of total federal expenditures.

 

[Priceless]

So we only pay taxes for what we personally use? Awesome! I assume the Army will deliver the tank they've been holding for me.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Death panels?

i said "better" not "ruthlessly cost-effective."

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So basically, everyone is on the dole at one time or another.

Isn't that the essence of the Double-Secret Grand Master Plan? "You get this so I can get that so that everyone gets something so that career politicians collectively become entrenched in office forever?"

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

You mean like the employees of Walgreens who are similarly being subsidized by their employer?

No, that's not at all what I mean. Employees of Walgreens are not required by statute to acquire insurance through public exchanges. Members of Congress and their staff are. They didn't like the consequences of the law they passed, and rather than revise it, they try to weasel out by subterfuge instead.

So you also surrender intellectual consistency at the altar of defend your Master from any and all criticism, eh? I thought you were a lawyer. I guess they teach utter disrespect for the law in law school these days, is that it?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Employer provided insurance does not pool people together based on their risk profile, period.

wow, can you provide any evidence to support this assertion? You've never heard of the term "experience rated?" are you honestly going to try to maintain that a pool of 30-year old construction workers are charged the same rate as a pool of 30-year old office workers, despite the greater risk of injury for the former vs the latter?


Based on your quote, you also are saying that people who live in New York City have the same premium rates as people who live in Cheyenne, Wyoming? even though hospitals and doctors in the former are considerably more expensive than they are in the latter? I mean, part of a risk profile are costs incurred, yet if employer-provided insurance is not priced based on risk profile, why then does employer-sponsored insurance have higher premiums in locations where medical expenses are higher?


It sounds like you don't have much actual practical experience in health insurance, just a lot of opinions about how you think it operates.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So we only pay taxes for what we personally use? Awesome! I assume the Army will deliver the tank they've been holding for me.

so that you personally can kill all the terrorists who show up at your doorstep once the army stops killing them overseas?

 

[unofan]

No, that's not at all what I mean. Employees of Walgreens are not required by statute to acquire insurance through public exchanges. Members of Congress and their staff are. They didn't like the consequences of the law they passed, and rather than revise it, they try to weasel out by subterfuge instead.

So you also surrender intellectual consistency at the altar of defend your Master from any and all criticism, eh? I thought you were a lawyer. I guess they teach utter disrespect for the law in law school these days, is that it?

As you say, the law requires them to get insurance on the exchanges. No where does it say the government can or cannot subsidize it as their employer like it did their previous insurance or like the majority of the 80% of Americans who get insurance thru the workplace. In the absence of specific statutory language, the executive branch is allowed to issue regulations consist with the law. The code of federal regulations is just as much valid law as the us code.

Additionally, if the law says what you and your chain email forwarding ilk think it says, the Vitter Amendment would be unnecessary and duplicative. Since courts presume congress would not pass (or attempt to pass, in this case) meaningless laws, the law must not be as you claim. Otherwise why would the Vitter Amendment be required?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So we only pay taxes for what we personally use? Awesome! I assume the Army will deliver the tank they've been holding for me.

Yeah, no kidding. Sorry everyone I guess I'm a ****ing freeloader. Where the **** is my food stamps etc? I should be getting as much as everyone else. In fact I want my unemployment insurance even though I'm working.

God this conversation is stupid.