Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 81

Thread: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Are you willing to turn people away from the ERs?
    And Doctors 1) know what they are getting into and 2) can leave at any time they want to.
    there is no involuntary servitude.
    You continue to evade the issue I originally presented.
    Why not just admit that you cannot effectively address it and leave it at that?

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Um, there's plenty of statistical basis for the idea that the government provides health care more efficiently than the private sector.
    You may present your citations at any time.

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Do you consider yourself responsible for taking care of our soldiers when they are in harm's way? Do you consider yourself responsible for maintaining Interstate Highways? Do you consider yourself responsible for paying for police? All these things, and more, require taxes? Are we being overtaxed? That is the question that is up for debate, and while we are at it, we should ask ourselves the following questions:

    1) Is GE a welfare loafer because it paid no taxes at all in 2010, but received subsidies from the Federal government?

    2) How about Morgan Stanley and other banksters, who ran their corporations into the ground, but were given money by the Federal government? Are they welfare loafers?

    3) What about corporate farmers, who get paid to grow nothing?

    4) How about Congress, who get free health care for life? Are they better than the rest of us? I thought they were supposed to be merely public servants.

    5) And how about all those corporations who don't pay a penny of tax because their postal address is a PO box in the Cayman Islands, even though their headquarters are physically located inside the US?

    Just a few examples here, which make me wonder why there is so great of an outcry against poor people, while not a whimper about the rich who pay nothing for the services they demand and receive.
    I see a lot of red herring, and a decided lack of argument as to how I am responsble to for providing health care to the people indicated.

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by shintao View Post
    I support it because it is the American way, and always has been.
    Involuntary servitude is, and always has been, the American way?

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    So the idea is that if you knowingly go into servitude its not servitude? Is it just me or does that not make any sense.
    It's not just you.
    To defend the indefenisble, one must fling nonsense, just as a monkey flings poo.

  6. #76
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,772

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    I think as usual …. the liberal fraction in here in their haste to support any government hand out .. . fails to see the point.

    If a couple of age to get Medicaid, has an income of $64,000 per year, should be able to afford insurance without government help. Chances are good that their kids are grown and on their own, their house is paid for. That $64,000 income should well be able to afford their own insurance.

    I'm not sure where liberals will stop with their living off of other people, but lets take into consideration that the average income in the US is around or under $50,000 a year, now you are expecting those people earning $50,000 a year to pay for retired people health care while they are earning $64,000 a year ???
    I'm glad you brought this up. I want people to re-read the commentary from the OP again...

    WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care law would let several million middle-class people get nearly free insurance meant for the poor, a twist government number crunchers say they discovered only after the complex bill was signed.

    The change would affect early retirees: A married couple could have an annual income of about $64,000 and still get Medicaid, said officials who make long-range cost estimates for the Health and Human Services department.

    Up to 3 million more people could qualify for Medicaid in 2014 as a result of the anomaly. That's because, in a major change from today, most of their Social Security benefits would no longer be counted as income for determining eligibility. It might be compared to allowing middle-class people to qualify for food stamps.
    Now, let's put this in perspective...

    We're not talking about Medicare here. Why? Because not all early-retirees are old enough to qualify for Medicare insurance. As such, they're in limbo as far as their health insurance is concerned. As an early retiree, they'd lose their health insurance as provided by their previous employer. Yes, they'd be eligible for COBRA, but as most people know COBRA (and SOBRA) are extremely expensive insurance plans. Thus, even if an early retiree were to find themselves as "empty nesters" - middle-aged individuals whose homes may be paid for (or nearly paid off) or whose children have grown up and moved out, having no pension plan that includes continued health insurance at a reasonable price at or near what they were paying while employeed will very likely place these people in great financial hardship even as early retirees.

    Now, those who are jumping off the cliff over "middle-aged former working class Americans having to pay into Medicaid" are just being partisan. Think about how the Medicaid system works...

    It is a joint-venture insurance program between the Federal government, the state, the individual and the health care provider. The Fed and the States pay equal amounts into the Medicaid system. The client pays a co-pay to Medicaid and the health care provider either accepts the bill in whole or on a sliding fee scale. Either way, the client still has to pay something towards the health care treatment he/she receives. In short, IT'S NOT FREE MEDICAL CARE! Now, for the down side of not allowing this "rider" to happen w/early retirees...

    They run the risk of going bankrupt. Let's say we have an early retiree of age 55, he can't qualify for Medicare until at 62.5 at the earliest. His health insurance from his previous employer jumps up from $275/mo. to $425 - it nearly doubles!!! He has no children living with him, his spouse was a stay-at-home mom being responsible for raising her children and keeping a household (home schooling and all because that's what many Conservatives claim is a better way to educate our children as opposed to sending them to public schools). He has a 401K plan from his job...for argument sake let's say it's worth $100,000. Seems like alot of money, right? A retired person should be able to live off that for a very long time. But...

    How much is real cost-of-living these days? How much does it take an individual to live on for a full year? According to 2009 Census data (which was the most current info I could find), the average median income in the U.S. was $50,221. Using my $100K example of an individual's 401K plan investment earnings (a figures I openly admit is an example and may not be the average for most middle-class wage earners), you can see that over half of an early retiree's networth may very well get drawn down by his cost-of-living alone.

    Think it through, people...put your selfishness and partisanship aside long enough to get the facts, learn the truth and care alittle.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 06-23-11 at 01:47 PM.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Think it through, people...put your selfishness and partisanship aside long enough to get the facts, learn the truth and care alittle.
    It's not a question of caring, it's a question of responsibilities.
    You are responsible for your health care, not me.

  8. #78
    Civil Libertarian
    DashingAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    08-31-17 @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,357

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I'm glad you brought this up. I want people to re-read the commentary from the OP again...



    Now, let's put this in perspective...

    We're not talking about Medicare here. Why? Because not all early-retirees are old enough to qualify for Medicare insurance. As such, they're in limbo as far as their health insurance is concerned. As an early retiree, they'd lose their health insurance as provided by their previous employer. Yes, they'd be eligible for COBRA, but as most people know COBRA (and SOBRA) are extremely expensive insurance plans. Thus, even if an early retiree were to find themselves as "empty nesters" - middle-aged individuals whose homes may be paid for (or nearly paid off) or whose children have grown up and moved out, having no pension plan that includes continued health insurance at a reasonable price at or near what they were paying while employeed will very likely place these people in great financial hardship even as early retirees.

    Now, those who are jumping off the cliff over "middle-aged former working class Americans having to pay into Medicaid" are just being partisan. Think about how the Medicaid system works...

    It is a joint-venture insurance program between the Federal government, the state, the individual and the health care provider. The Fed and the States pay equal amounts into the Medicaid system. The client pays a co-pay to Medicaid and the health care provider either accepts the bill in whole or on a sliding fee scale. Either way, the client still has to pay something towards the health care treatment he/she receives. In short, IT'S NOT FREE MEDICAL CARE! Now, for the down side of not allowing this "rider" to happen w/early retirees...

    They run the risk of going bankrupt. Let's say we have an early retiree of age 55, he can't qualify for Medicare until at 62.5 at the earliest. His health insurance from his previous employer jumps up from $275/mo. to $425 - it nearly doubles!!! He has no children living with him, his spouse was a stay-at-home mom being responsible for raising her children and keeping a household (home schooling and all because that's what many Conservatives claim is a better way to educate our children as opposed to sending them to public schools). He has a 401K plan from his job...for argument sake let's say it's worth $100,000. Seems like alot of money, right? A retired person should be able to live off that for a very long time. But...

    How much is real cost-of-living these days? How much does it take an individual to live on for a full year? According to 2009 Census data (which was the most current info I could find), the average median income in the U.S. was $50,221. Using my $100K example of an individual's 401K plan investment earnings (a figures I openly admit is an example and may not be the average for most middle-class wage earners), you can see that over half of an early retiree's networth may very well get drawn down by his cost-of-living alone.

    Think it through, people...put your selfishness and partisanship aside long enough to get the facts, learn the truth and care alittle.
    People that care contribute to a charity that helps people with such things. It's NOT caring when you are FORCED to do it.
    If you strike me down, I'll become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-12 @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,928

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    If we just spend MORE, and borrow more, we can work our way out of this
    The sorry part is, there are dumbass liberals on this forum that actually believe that.

  10. #80
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    03-23-13 @ 02:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,265

    Re: AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I'm glad you brought this up. I want people to re-read the commentary from the OP again...



    Now, let's put this in perspective...

    We're not talking about Medicare here. Why? Because not all early-retirees are old enough to qualify for Medicare insurance. As such, they're in limbo as far as their health insurance is concerned. As an early retiree, they'd lose their health insurance as provided by their previous employer. Yes, they'd be eligible for COBRA, but as most people know COBRA (and SOBRA) are extremely expensive insurance plans. Thus, even if an early retiree were to find themselves as "empty nesters" - middle-aged individuals whose homes may be paid for (or nearly paid off) or whose children have grown up and moved out, having no pension plan that includes continued health insurance at a reasonable price at or near what they were paying while employeed will very likely place these people in great financial hardship even as early retirees.

    Now, those who are jumping off the cliff over "middle-aged former working class Americans having to pay into Medicaid" are just being partisan. Think about how the Medicaid system works...

    It is a joint-venture insurance program between the Federal government, the state, the individual and the health care provider. The Fed and the States pay equal amounts into the Medicaid system. The client pays a co-pay to Medicaid and the health care provider either accepts the bill in whole or on a sliding fee scale. Either way, the client still has to pay something towards the health care treatment he/she receives. In short, IT'S NOT FREE MEDICAL CARE! Now, for the down side of not allowing this "rider" to happen w/early retirees...

    They run the risk of going bankrupt. Let's say we have an early retiree of age 55, he can't qualify for Medicare until at 62.5 at the earliest. His health insurance from his previous employer jumps up from $275/mo. to $425 - it nearly doubles!!! He has no children living with him, his spouse was a stay-at-home mom being responsible for raising her children and keeping a household (home schooling and all because that's what many Conservatives claim is a better way to educate our children as opposed to sending them to public schools). He has a 401K plan from his job...for argument sake let's say it's worth $100,000. Seems like alot of money, right? A retired person should be able to live off that for a very long time. But...

    How much is real cost-of-living these days? How much does it take an individual to live on for a full year? According to 2009 Census data (which was the most current info I could find), the average median income in the U.S. was $50,221. Using my $100K example of an individual's 401K plan investment earnings (a figures I openly admit is an example and may not be the average for most middle-class wage earners), you can see that over half of an early retiree's networth may very well get drawn down by his cost-of-living alone.

    Think it through, people...put your selfishness and partisanship aside long enough to get the facts, learn the truth and care alittle.
    yes think it through, but I see you forgot to mention one "important" little fact .. this same couple you are talking about .. has an "INCOME" of $64,000 a year I don't know where you have your investments .. . but to retire at age 55 as your example shows .. you are going to need to have a hell of a lot more then $100,000 in investments to have an annual income of $64.000 ... so you said a lot .. but none of it really applies now does it ?

    Also you leave out responsibility in the example .. are you going to retire at age 55 .. if you can't afford to live and need government assistance ? Just another shining example of your liberal thinking process .. hell just give help to anyone that is too dumb or lazy to take care of themselves
    Last edited by The Barbarian; 06-24-11 at 01:26 AM.

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •