• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Health care law's massive, hidden tax change

Again I understand you work with private health insurance. You understand I don't think that should job should exist. Lets just leave it at that shall we?
Absolutely not. You have attacked my industry, used propaganda in that attack, and are advocating for a horrid replacement instead of trying to learn what's actually wrong with it. I have explained the problems in great detail all over this forum, mainly with the backing of a mod who is on the provider end, we tend to agree on the issues for the most part.
 
Absolutely not. You have attacked my industry, used propaganda in that attack, and are advocating for a horrid replacement instead of trying to learn what's actually wrong with it. I have explained the problems in great detail all over this forum, mainly with the backing of a mod who is on the provider end, we tend to agree on the issues for the most part.

Yeah perfectly logical "propaganda" and I pretty much see the private health insurance industry as an illegitimate waste of the public's money based on that "propaganda". You work in an unnecessary middle man position for profit often at the cost of the people your supposed to be helping. This is not a personal attack it's the nature of your buisness and I find it repugnant.
 
Yeah perfectly logical "propaganda"
Wrong, there cannot be logic because it uses incomplete and/or dishonest analysis, I notice you never did challenge that.
and I pretty much see the private health insurance industry as an illegitimate waste of the public's money based on that "propaganda".
And now you will be reported for baiting. But I will answer again, insurance is a choice that you make, it's a service and based on mathematical analysis based on probability and risk. As well my industry compiles these factors on a daily basis. It is perfectly legitimate business.
You work in an unnecessary middle man position for profit often at the cost of the people your supposed to be helping. This is not a personal attack it's the nature of your buisness and I find it repugnant.
So you cannot produce worthwhile debate, commentary, sources or arguments and you resort to character attacks. Noted.
 
Again I understand you work with private health insurance. You understand I don't think that should job should exist. Lets just leave it at that shall we?

You have to remember something here.

You're advocating forcing people to participate in a government managed medical system.
LaMid isn't doing that, he wants things to be based on choice.
 
Just because you have a choice doesn't mean your options are good. I'd rather be forced into one good option than have my choice of dozens of bad ones.

And most people don't have dozens of options when it comes to healthcare.
 
Sure about that? No car means you have to find another means to work, not every city has transportation, no restaurants/stores/farmers/meat producers means you must gather your own food, without them most Americans would probably starve.

A farmer, harvester, producer, packager at a plant =/= Restaurant chef or wait staff. :shrug: At first you specifically said "restaurant" which for many is an extreme luxury they don't "need" - There's a huge difference. Between the Supply-chain and the luxury-chain.

Insurance is a service, so is medical care. If you want the best you have to pay, end of story.

Yeah - I have no problem with people choosing and then paying for their desired level of insurance they want to have - I simply don't like the pocket-profit that is behind it - including windfalls that come via stocks to holders.

My view is not the same thing as someone who might say we don't "need" insurance. I do believe we need insurance, and I believe that it can be run balanced and fair.

Ah, but they are service providers, as are insurers.

Profit is what you are left over with AFTER you pay your benefit-costs, reimbursements, travel, employees' pay, taxes and fees, licenses, proxy labor, utilities and so on - so forth. Profit is extra for a company to do *whatever they want to* with.

If insurance is mandatory and they're charging 500 people $100.00 / year for insurance that equals $50,000 a year paid to the insurance company. If, after paying all that extra, an insurance company ends up with a 2% profit ($1,000) that they can do whatever with - why not refund it to the people as 'overpay'
 
Last edited:
Just because you have a choice doesn't mean your options are good. I'd rather be forced into one good option than have my choice of dozens of bad ones.

And most people don't have dozens of options when it comes to healthcare.

well - so I support the government offering it's own healthcare, I have no problem with that - but I just don't like how they went about doing it.
 
Just because you have a choice doesn't mean your options are good. I'd rather be forced into one good option than have my choice of dozens of bad ones.

And most people don't have dozens of options when it comes to healthcare.

Some people don't and that is mostly the fault of government mismanagement.

I understand that there is a contingency of people who have no access, aka those born with lifelong medical conditions.
That I am fine with giving a type of UHC for, on the other hand medical care costs money.
There is no such thing as a free lunch and for us to constantly give state hand outs for those who don't take their life, in their hands is stupid and counter productive.
 
well - so I support the government offering it's own healthcare, I have no problem with that - but I just don't like how they went about doing it.

Frankly, neither do I. This healthcare "reform" they've passed is nothing but a bunch of prohibitively expensive mandates that will have no bearing whatsoever on the actual cost of healthcare. It's obscene.

That I am fine with giving a type of UHC for, on the other hand medical care costs money.
There is no such thing as a free lunch and for us to constantly give state hand outs for those who don't take their life, in their hands is stupid and counter productive.

You'll get no argument there from me. But if it is more efficient for all of us to pay for healthcare collectively through our taxes than to pay individually out of pocket, then that is what we should do. All of the countries whose citizens are healthier than ours have State-funded universal healthcare plans, and most of them pay less than half per capita of what we spend on our baroque semi-privatized system.
 
Just because you have a choice doesn't mean your options are good. I'd rather be forced into one good option than have my choice of dozens of bad ones.
It's true that some people are in dire straits when it comes to their options, but I will never accept somebody in Washington deciding my life for me as they are not my parents and certainly not entitled to the honor of being my keeper in this country.

And most people don't have dozens of options when it comes to healthcare.
Slight correction, there are always options, though they may not be great or inexpensive. I find that most people aren't willing to put in the work to find those options.
 
A farmer, harvester, producer, packager at a plant =/= Restaurant chef or wait staff. :shrug: At first you specifically said "restaurant" which for many is an extreme luxury they don't "need" - There's a huge difference. Between the Supply-chain and the luxury-chain.
I specifically mentioned restaurant only because it was the first thing that came to mind. The overall point is that all goods and services are pretty much a choice, nobody seems to mind when other necessities provide a profit so I would expect the same courtesy to be shown to the healthcare commodity.



Yeah - I have no problem with people choosing and then paying for their desired level of insurance they want to have - I simply don't like the pocket-profit that is behind it - including windfalls that come via stocks to holders.
There is no health insurance windfall, in fact most if not all health insurers are under the standard profit margin of the accepted average of success. Usually around 5.5-6% versus the norm of 9+
My view is not the same thing as someone who might say we don't "need" insurance. I do believe we need insurance, and I believe that it can be run balanced and fair.
There is no such thing as "balanced and fair" in insurance, everyone has a different set of needs in life for things to be equal everyone would have to have the same circumstances.


Profit is what you are left over with AFTER you pay your benefit-costs, reimbursements, travel, employees' pay, taxes and fees, licenses, proxy labor, utilities and so on - so forth. Profit is extra for a company to do *whatever they want to* with.
Nope, profit is also accounted to shareholders, some has to be witheld for government mandated responsibilities, etc. So no, there is no "windfall".
If insurance is mandatory and they're charging 500 people $100.00 / year for insurance that equals $50,000 a year paid to the insurance company. If, after paying all that extra, an insurance company ends up with a 2% profit ($1,000) that they can do whatever with - why not refund it to the people as 'overpay'
Why the hell would a business keep the doors open for less than acceptable profit. It is their earned money for a service provided.
 
cbo still says obamacare may reduce the deficit.
 
Incorrect, the bill reclassified benefits as income, group insurance is not insurance, it is a benefit.

Ah, but some benefits are indeed part of the insurance package no?

Except that the messenger in this case is also trying to play advocate and is not qualified.

How is the 1099 playing advocate?

The fact is the I.R.S is going to be given more power with this bill when they already have too much, the fact is taxes are going up, and the fact is the 1099 is a part of that.

Except that the 1099 merely reports what would be income regardless of the 1099's existence. Complaining about the form when it effectively does nothing is rather idiotic.

Off topic. The fact is that this bill will drastically increase taxes past what people are accustomed to with the current I.R.S. and it's abusive powers.

Not necessarily. The primarily underlying theme here is anti-tax. The real threat isn't this reclass. If people actually did care about anti-tax and especially about IRS power, you'd be trying to stop individual Fin 48.

I take it you don't know what Fin 48 is?
 
Ah, but some benefits are indeed part of the insurance package no?
For classification purposes no. Insurance is owned by the contract holder, if you have insurance you own the policy, if you have a group package the employer owns the policy and you have use of it, but it isn't truly insurance as it isn't portable.



How is the 1099 playing advocate?
You mentioned shoot the messenger, so I assumed you meant the people advocating for it's inclusion and not the form itself. Still. this is yet another backdoor tax increase and should be immediately excluded.



Except that the 1099 merely reports what would be income regardless of the 1099's existence. Complaining about the form when it effectively does nothing is rather idiotic.
Except that it's use is being extended past what is actually within it's scope for the purposes of funding a worthless and unpopular bill.



Not necessarily. The primarily underlying theme here is anti-tax. The real threat isn't this reclass. If people actually did care about anti-tax and especially about IRS power, you'd be trying to stop individual Fin 48.
I take it you don't know what Fin 48 is?
Yes and no. I've never had to use one as it doesn't pertain to my lines, but that is not the point of this thread, the fact is that taxes are going up, they are hidden by using very onerous methods, and the 1099 is all a part of it.
EDIT- you bet there is an anti-tax theme, since the taxes are being increased for something people don't want and passed by a bunch of idiots with no working knowledge of the industry. People instictively know this whole issue was a power grab with more to follow.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom