Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 260

Thread: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

  1. #91
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,762

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The bill would place a 4% tax on companies that out $200,000 in payroll, who elected not to provide insurance for their employees. The tax rate goes up to 8% at $400,000 and above.
    Alright, so what you're saying is that you're against taxing anyone who doesn't provide insurance to their employees. Here's the catch with not doing so: People and employers would simply drop their insurance coverage. And we'd end up with millions more people jumping onto Medicaid or worse, not having any health insurance at all. And then we end up with 1) and far less healthier country, 2) larger government debt from covering these people, but most of all, 3) tax paying citizens continuing to have their health care premiums rise because they'd be paying more and more of that hidden fee for emergency room visits which we all know people WILL use and sit back and wait for the bill for the initial "free-bee" health care they just received.

    How many people pay their emergency room bill in a timely manner? 30 days? 60 days? 90 days after receiving treatment? Chances are most of us (myself included) pay this type of medical bill off whenever we can afford it...paying a little here and a little there. I mean, let's be honest! If you can't afford to pay it, you can't afford to pay it. Thing is, some people use the emergency room as "primary care" while others (like me) use it only when you have no other choise, i.e., a late night accident and your doctor's office is closed at 2:30am.

    IMO, the only way to force everyone to have health insurance is to impose a tax. Like it or not, it's the only way to reduce health care costs in the long run.

    (Oh, one other thing, apdst. The Reps are also proposing a tax penalty on business large and small who do not provide health care coverage to their employees. Don't believe me? Read the Policy Option for yourself and see...last paragraph, bottom of page 40.)
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-09-09 at 05:23 PM.

  2. #92
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Alright, so what you're saying is that you're against taxing anyone who doesn't provide insurance to their employees. Here's the catch with not doing so: People and employers would simply drop their insurance coverage. And we'd end up with millions more people jumping onto Medicaid or worse, not having any health insurance at all. And then we end up with 1) and far less healthier country, 2) larger government debt from covering these people, but most of all, 3) tax paying citizens continuing to have their health care premiums rise because they'd be paying more and more of that hidden fee for emergency room visits which we all know people WILL use and sit back and wait for the bill for the initial "free-bee" health care they just received.

    How many people pay their emergency room bill in a timely manner? 30 days? 60 days? 90 days after receiving treatment? Chances are most of us (myself included) pay this type of medical bill off whenever we can afford it...paying a little here and a little there. I mean, let's be honest! If you can't afford to pay it, you can't afford to pay it. Thing is, some people use the emergency room as "primary care" while others (like me) use it only when you have no other choise, i.e., a late night accident and your doctor's office is closed at 2:30am.

    IMO, the only way to force everyone to have health insurance is to impose a tax. Like it or not, it's the only way to reduce health care costs in the long run.
    Hmm...I actually agree with apdst about something. I agree that companies should not be taxed, but probably for a completely different reason: We need to transition away from employer-based health care. The idea of health care tied to employment creates enormous economic inefficiency, because people are afraid to quit to look for a better job, or start their own business, or get an education, because they can't lose their health benefits. We'd be better off if we transitioned to an individual health insurance system (private or public).

    I'd rather fine individuals who don't have health insurance instead of employers who don't provide it.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #93
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,762

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Hmm...I actually agree with apdst about something. I agree that companies should not be taxed, but probably for a completely different reason: We need to transition away from employer-based health care. The idea of health care tied to employment creates enormous economic inefficiency, because people are afraid to quit to look for a better job, or start their own business, or get an education, because they can't lose their health benefits. We'd be better off if we transitioned to an individual health insurance system (private or public).

    I'd rather fine individuals who don't have health insurance instead of employers who don't provide it.
    This was Senator McCain's approach as well, but one thing you forget is the cost to the individual for that insurance. Unless you can bring the cost down considerably AND provide the employee with more options to choose from, you'll never be able to break the cycle of providing low-cost health care to all on the open market EXCEPT via ones employer.

    On the surface of it, I agree with "privaticing" health care fully, but how do you do it AND provide affordability, choice and portability?

    Solutions are welcome. Think it through, people.

  4. #94
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,219

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Alright, so what you're saying is that you're against taxing anyone who doesn't provide insurance to their employees. Here's the catch with not doing so: People and employers would simply drop their insurance coverage. And we'd end up with millions more people jumping onto Medicaid or worse, not having any health insurance at all. And then we end up with 1) and far less healthier country, 2) larger government debt from covering these people, but most of all, 3) tax paying citizens continuing to have their health care premiums rise because they'd be paying more and more of that hidden fee for emergency room visits which we all know people WILL use and sit back and wait for the bill for the initial "free-bee" health care they just received.

    How many people pay their emergency room bill in a timely manner? 30 days? 60 days? 90 days after receiving treatment? Chances are most of us (myself included) pay this type of medical bill off whenever we can afford it...paying a little here and a little there. I mean, let's be honest! If you can't afford to pay it, you can't afford to pay it. Thing is, some people use the emergency room as "primary care" while others (like me) use it only when you have no other choise, i.e., a late night accident and your doctor's office is closed at 2:30am.
    No, you're not getting it. I'm opposed to forcing companies to pay alot of money if they don't provide insurance, or pay a helluva lot of money to provide insurance for their employees.

    4% of $200,000 is $8,000. An $8,000 tax bill, for a small business could force many of them out of business. It doesn't take a very big business to to pay out a $200,000 a year payroll. So, they only have two choices, pay $8,000+ in taxes, plus whatever other taxes they already have to pay, or provide insurance for their employees that could easily cost $30,000+ a year. All that will be accomplished is further dismantling of the economy.

    IMO, the only way to force everyone to have health insurance is to impose a tax. Like it or not, it's the only way to reduce health care costs in the long run.
    Therein lies the problem. This is the United States. The government shouldn't be forcing people to get health insurance, so as to pay for someone else who doesn't lift a finger to do anything for themselves. This is nothing more than the largest entitelment program in the history of the country, reducing health care costs has nothing to do with it. When's the last time the government did anything and reduced costs?

    The single motivation for this bill is to take from the working class and give to the welfare class.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #95
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,219

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post

    I'd rather fine individuals who don't have health insurance instead of employers who don't provide it.

    So, you're cool with fining an idividual $3,800 a year for not buying health coverage? Do you have $3,800 bucks just laying around, doing nothing? I don't. But, hey, I think they should do that very thing, because the Libbos will be driving s stake right through their own hearts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #96
    Professor
    other's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    VA
    Last Seen
    01-22-14 @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,473

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    You're wrong about mandatory auto insurance. It isn't to protect you, it's to protect the other party with whom you might have an accident. It's why the minimum auto insurance you need to buy (at least in most states) doesn't cover your car or yourself at all...it only covers other people and their property. The purpose of these laws is to prevent you from not carrying auto insurance, causing an accident, and then leaving a blameless person with thousands of dollars in medical bills or car damages.
    Right, so how is this analogous to the debate in healthcare? Mandatory liability insurance is to protect others because driving is inherrently dangerous with the potential of causing lots of damage; Health insurance is to protect yourself, and like extended (non-mandatory) vehical coverage is optional.

    If you want to argue that those without health covrage still may use health service and incur costs on others, well, that's a problem with the laws already in place (either not being enforced or allowing for too many loopholes), not a person's choice not to be covered. If you are worried about this issue, you should advocate that ER patients be hit with the bill after they recover, and if you believe it's wrong that they can just file for bankruptcy at skip out on the bill then your problem is with bankruptcy procedure, not actual healthcare.

  7. #97
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,762

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    I won't disagree with you on the later part of your post above, but you're not quite right on your take on small businesses being taxed.

    There's atlelast three sections in H.R. 3200 and atleast one in the Policy Option that caters directly to taxation on small business (2-50 employees, if I remember the number correctly). Small business would fall in a completely different "tax bracket", so to speak, and would NOT be looked at in the same way as major corporations/state-government would. I'm sure the numbers you've quoted are for major corporations. For small business, H.R. 3200 provides tons of credits to help them offset the cost for providing health care coverage to their employees. In fact, there's very little in it that outlines imposing a tax on them, but I'm sure they'd be penalized just the same for not providing health care coverage for their employees just as big businesses would. Point is, businesses large and small would get help to defray the cost of health care.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-09-09 at 05:38 PM.

  8. #98
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    You're wrong about mandatory auto insurance. It isn't to protect you, it's to protect the other party with whom you might have an accident. It's why the minimum auto insurance you need to buy (at least in most states) doesn't cover your car or yourself at all...it only covers other people and their property. The purpose of these laws is to prevent you from not carrying auto insurance, causing an accident, and then leaving a blameless person with thousands of dollars in medical bills or car damages.
    Yes, to protect you from an enormous debt should you ever be at fault for an accident.

    And that still does not address the fact that driving and having a need for auto insurance are totally optional.

    The whole idea of fining people preemptively before they don't pay a bill is retarded no matter how you attempt to justify it.

  9. #99
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    So, you're cool with fining an idividual $3,800 a year for not buying health coverage? Do you have $3,800 bucks just laying around, doing nothing?
    Irrelevant. I have health insurance.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    I don't.
    Then you especially need health insurance, because if you don't have the money to pay premiums, how would you ever pay your medical bills?
    Last edited by Kandahar; 09-09-09 at 05:40 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #100
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,219

    Re: Fines proposed for going without health insurance

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I won't disagree with you on the later part of your post above, but you're not quite right on your take on small businesses being taxed.

    There's an entire section in H.R. 3200 and within the Policy Option as well that caters directly to taxation on small business (2-50 employees, if I remember the number correctly). Small business would fall in a completely different "tax bracket", so to speak, and would NOT be looked at in the same way as major corporations/state-government would. I'm sure the numbers you've quoted are for major corporations. For small business, H.R. 3200 provides tons of credits to help them offset the cost for providing health care coverage to their employees. In fact, there's very little in it that outlines imposing a tax on them, but I'm sure they'd be penalized just the same for not providing health care coverage for their employees just as big businesses would. Point is, businesses large and small would get help to defray the cost of health care.

    Businesses, small and large, fall under the same tax laws. Small businesses don't get any breaks that large businesses don't get. There is no destinction between small and large businesses.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... 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
  •