USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
- Thread starter dxmnkd316
- Start date
- Status
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Depends on how they structure it but if I had to guess its only people who pay enough taxes will get it.
For example, if you deduct student loans or get the child tax credit, one reduces your taxable income and the other reduced the amount of tax you owe. However, if you already owe no taxes, no benefit. On the other hand I believe the EIC is money paid out to you as a low income worker even if you don't make enough to pay taxes.
Depends on how they structure it but if I had to guess its only people who pay enough taxes will get it.
For example, if you deduct student loans or get the child tax credit, one reduces your taxable income and the other reduced the amount of tax you owe. However, if you already owe no taxes, no benefit. On the other hand I believe the EIC is money paid out to you as a low income worker even if you don't make enough to pay taxes.
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
There is no possible way to have health insurance without also having an insurance company. The only question we have is whether there is monopoly power concentrated in a single insurance company wholly owned by and run by the US government itself, or whether we have competition among several different private insurance companies.
and before someone trots out the hoary, false chestnut about Medicare having "lower administrative costs," that statistic is really misleading, because they omit several major costs from that measure (for example, losses to fraud, which are substantial, are not counted as an administrative "cost"; nor are the enforcement efforts to combat fraud counted; nor are the administrative costs that the government forces other entities to incur on its behalf included either).
There is no possible way to have health insurance without also having an insurance company. The only question we have is whether there is monopoly power concentrated in a single insurance company wholly owned by and run by the US government itself, or whether we have competition among several different private insurance companies.
and before someone trots out the hoary, false chestnut about Medicare having "lower administrative costs," that statistic is really misleading, because they omit several major costs from that measure (for example, losses to fraud, which are substantial, are not counted as an administrative "cost"; nor are the enforcement efforts to combat fraud counted; nor are the administrative costs that the government forces other entities to incur on its behalf included either).
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
I thought there was a substantial constituency in favor of "single payor"??
So, a plan is proposed under which the government will give money to everyone that can only be used to purchase health insurance, and those who claim to favor "single payor" are against it?
Is it really single payor that they want? or is the term "single payor" some code word for "command and control" instead??
I thought there was a substantial constituency in favor of "single payor"??
So, a plan is proposed under which the government will give money to everyone that can only be used to purchase health insurance, and those who claim to favor "single payor" are against it?
Is it really single payor that they want? or is the term "single payor" some code word for "command and control" instead??
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
The proposal is similar to the Earned Income Credit; if you have low/no income, you actually get a cash payment which only can be used to purchase health insurance (or a dollar-for-dollar reduction in your income tax bill, if your income is somewhat higher; phasing out as income rises). Some states have been experimenting with this kind of design for Medicaid already and the early results are promising; more care for less money, because of a combination of competition in the marketplace and healthcare users being forced to pay more attention to what they are doing about their health.
The big difference is that you can go out and choose a health insurance policy from a wide array of different offerings; there will no longer be thousand-page long regulations that spell out every detail of every policy clause that must be included.
and all the bizarre cross-subsidies are out too: no longer will post-menopausal women be forced to pay for maternity coverage, no longer will young healthy people be forced to pay for a 60-year old's hip replacement.
One of the things they didn't do, which they had promised, was to cap the income tax deduction for employer-sponsored health insurance.
The proposal is similar to the Earned Income Credit; if you have low/no income, you actually get a cash payment which only can be used to purchase health insurance (or a dollar-for-dollar reduction in your income tax bill, if your income is somewhat higher; phasing out as income rises). Some states have been experimenting with this kind of design for Medicaid already and the early results are promising; more care for less money, because of a combination of competition in the marketplace and healthcare users being forced to pay more attention to what they are doing about their health.
The big difference is that you can go out and choose a health insurance policy from a wide array of different offerings; there will no longer be thousand-page long regulations that spell out every detail of every policy clause that must be included.
and all the bizarre cross-subsidies are out too: no longer will post-menopausal women be forced to pay for maternity coverage, no longer will young healthy people be forced to pay for a 60-year old's hip replacement.
One of the things they didn't do, which they had promised, was to cap the income tax deduction for employer-sponsored health insurance.
Last edited:
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
WHo gives a **** about competition when the only player in town is a non-profit and has absolutely no profit motive whatsoever?
They don't pay someone tens of millions of dollars while patients get fu_ked.
WHo gives a **** about competition when the only player in town is a non-profit and has absolutely no profit motive whatsoever?
They don't pay someone tens of millions of dollars while patients get fu_ked.
Last edited:
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Are you actually this stupid or are you the bot Kepler thinks you are? (or both)
Are you actually this stupid or are you the bot Kepler thinks you are? (or both)
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Bot.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
So you are fully ok with a company that sole job is to make a profit telling me how I can spend my healtcare dollars? They do NOTHING other than that.
BTW, I'm not sure if you checked- but for profit companies ALSO have to deal with fraud, and all of the parts that entails that. Given how inept we see companies run, I've never understood why people ASSume that a for profit company will inherently do a better job than a government run one. Most have incompetence, fraud, mistakes, and humans too. Many include massive greed, and some even massive criminal greed.
All we really NEED is a pool of money that we can all use to pay doctors and the professionals who actually do work on people.
The real problem is that people like you and flaggy who can't see the money situation as a simple control box- money vs money out. You pretend that giving $100 to entity X to get $90 back in services is ok if it's a for profit company and horrible if it's a government agency. Dude- it's just conservation of money- it does not matter where it goes, it's out of your pocket.
A single agency could easily be set up using the administration workers of all of the for profit companies, so there's the people who do the real work in companies. If management is needed, take them at a government pay rate. Not at the multi-millions in compensation that some of them get right now (did i mention how little service they actually provide, other than telling you what you can't spend money on?).
Again, I, personally, question the morality of someone making a lot of money basically doing nothing but rationing out the ability to get healthcare.
So you are fully ok with a company that sole job is to make a profit telling me how I can spend my healtcare dollars? They do NOTHING other than that.
BTW, I'm not sure if you checked- but for profit companies ALSO have to deal with fraud, and all of the parts that entails that. Given how inept we see companies run, I've never understood why people ASSume that a for profit company will inherently do a better job than a government run one. Most have incompetence, fraud, mistakes, and humans too. Many include massive greed, and some even massive criminal greed.
All we really NEED is a pool of money that we can all use to pay doctors and the professionals who actually do work on people.
The real problem is that people like you and flaggy who can't see the money situation as a simple control box- money vs money out. You pretend that giving $100 to entity X to get $90 back in services is ok if it's a for profit company and horrible if it's a government agency. Dude- it's just conservation of money- it does not matter where it goes, it's out of your pocket.
A single agency could easily be set up using the administration workers of all of the for profit companies, so there's the people who do the real work in companies. If management is needed, take them at a government pay rate. Not at the multi-millions in compensation that some of them get right now (did i mention how little service they actually provide, other than telling you what you can't spend money on?).
Again, I, personally, question the morality of someone making a lot of money basically doing nothing but rationing out the ability to get healthcare.
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Uh, women don't usually get pregnant on their own.
Uh, women don't usually get pregnant on their own.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
The entire Republican philosophy can be summed up thusly: "it's your misfortune and none of my own."
The entire Republican philosophy can be summed up thusly: "it's your misfortune and none of my own."
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Not a Republican on this planet that believes that.
Not a Republican on this planet that believes that.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
The Dems should be doing everything they can to force this. The GOP wants this, let them have it. This will backfire so badly no GOP legislator will be safe. (especially if they go Nuclear)
Nothing is going to stop the repeal anyways...Trump promised it and Ryan has been praying for it for years. TrumpCare is going to be their undoing. Everyone knows what this is, even the people who dont normally pay attention. Conservative and Liberal groups are completely against it and will make sure everyone knows why. There wont be any more town halls because not one of these clowns is going to want to be in public when they see the reaction.
In two years everyone will be begging for ObamaCare back but it will be too late.
If I had the means, I would be buying stock in every Health Care Company I could because they are going to make a massive windfall on all of this!
The Dems should be doing everything they can to force this. The GOP wants this, let them have it. This will backfire so badly no GOP legislator will be safe. (especially if they go Nuclear)
Nothing is going to stop the repeal anyways...Trump promised it and Ryan has been praying for it for years. TrumpCare is going to be their undoing. Everyone knows what this is, even the people who dont normally pay attention. Conservative and Liberal groups are completely against it and will make sure everyone knows why. There wont be any more town halls because not one of these clowns is going to want to be in public when they see the reaction.
In two years everyone will be begging for ObamaCare back but it will be too late.
If I had the means, I would be buying stock in every Health Care Company I could because they are going to make a massive windfall on all of this!
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
I agree with all of this.
I also support the end of the 60-vote cloture limit. IINM it was 67 for most of our history. Make it 51. The Senate's longer terms and three classes still make it the "cooling" body, and as I've said before the 60 vote limit allows Senators to spread incendiary rhetoric and poison the well because they know the other party will save them.
Let the GOP force through all their backwards lunacy and then stab them in the face for what it does to people -- by the look of it, what it does most to their own dumb voters. The Republican party has had a fifty year holiday from the consequences of their spiteful lies. Make them answer for it: give the American people a taste of what life in the GOP's neofeudal utopia is like.
It's finally time to call the schoolyard bully's bluff.
I agree with all of this.
I also support the end of the 60-vote cloture limit. IINM it was 67 for most of our history. Make it 51. The Senate's longer terms and three classes still make it the "cooling" body, and as I've said before the 60 vote limit allows Senators to spread incendiary rhetoric and poison the well because they know the other party will save them.
Let the GOP force through all their backwards lunacy and then stab them in the face for what it does to people -- by the look of it, what it does most to their own dumb voters. The Republican party has had a fifty year holiday from the consequences of their spiteful lies. Make them answer for it: give the American people a taste of what life in the GOP's neofeudal utopia is like.
It's finally time to call the schoolyard bully's bluff.
Last edited:
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Exactly. Let them do all of it and when they try and blame the Dems even the most out of touch GOPer will know it is a bunch of crap.
If Trump was half the businessman he pretends to be he would be getting away from this one as fast as possible. Hell he should be doing touchdown dances over the jobs report (not that he is responsible but still as always the Prez gets the credit) but everyone is ignoring it because of this Edsel of a plan.
Exactly. Let them do all of it and when they try and blame the Dems even the most out of touch GOPer will know it is a bunch of crap.
If Trump was half the businessman he pretends to be he would be getting away from this one as fast as possible. Hell he should be doing touchdown dances over the jobs report (not that he is responsible but still as always the Prez gets the credit) but everyone is ignoring it because of this Edsel of a plan.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: The PPACA Thread Part IV - Repeal & Replace, or Something...
Not all, not even most. 30% of the electorate (read: 60% of Republicans) are hopeless -- they would feed their own child into the wood chipper if O'Reilly or Trump told them to.
But that leaves 70% of the electorate including 40% of Republicans who will finally understand exactly what "a government small enough to drown in a bathtub" means: no protection when the strong come to pound the weak into the dirt.
Not all, not even most. 30% of the electorate (read: 60% of Republicans) are hopeless -- they would feed their own child into the wood chipper if O'Reilly or Trump told them to.
But that leaves 70% of the electorate including 40% of Republicans who will finally understand exactly what "a government small enough to drown in a bathtub" means: no protection when the strong come to pound the weak into the dirt.
- Status