• 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!

By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all[W:116]

poweRob

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
83,698
Reaction score
58,399
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
GOP really doesn't want to win elections much anymore. I mean we have the trump fiasco, tied with the Moore fiasco and while their at it... lets take away a lot of people's healthcare. I say go for it. Let the people see who you are and vote for or against such behavior it in the future. It's sad that the GOP is so desperate that they have to do this underhanded maneuver to repeal Obamacare by making it a part of their tax bill. But they must please their corporate masters before thinking about their constituents.

By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all

Despite nearly a year's worth of heartache, Republicans can't quit trying to repeal Obamacare.

Senate Republicans plan to include a repeal of the individual mandate -- a key piece of the Affordable Care Act -- in their tax reform efforts. It's a move that dramatically raises the stakes for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who are still looking for a single, substantial legislative accomplishment to deliver to the American people this year.​
 
The problem with Obamacare is at first glance it's a medical program. But when you look at it seriously, it's an income redistribution program at the expense of the middle class.

https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/out-of-pocket-maximum-limit/

The out-of-pocket limit doesn't include your monthly premiums. It also doesn't include anything you spend for services your plan doesn't cover.

For the 2017 plan year: The out-of-pocket limit for a Marketplace plan is $7,150 for an individual plan and $14,300 for a family plan.
For the 2016 plan year: The out-of-pocket limit for a 2016 Marketplace plan is $6,850 for an individual plan and $13,700 for a family plan.

Example of out-of-pocket maximum with high medical costs

Let's say you need surgery with allowable costs of $20,000, and the following figures apply to your health insurance plan.

Deductible: $1,300
Coinsurance: 20%
Out-of-pocket maximum: $4,400

You pay the first $1,300 of covered medical expenses (your deductible).

Your 20% coinsurance on the rest of the costs ($18,700) comes to $3,740.

So your total costs would be $5,040. That's $1,300 (your deductible) plus $3,740 (coinsurance).

But your out-of-pocket maximum is $4,400. Your insurance company pays all covered costs above $4,400 — for this surgery and any covered care you get for the rest of the plan year.

Generally, plans with lower monthly premiums have higher out-of-pocket limits. Plans with higher premiums usually have lower out-of-pocket maximums.
Click to expand...

This is starting too look like the old 80/20 plans before medial care cost got crazy expensive. So don't be so hard on the Republicans for trying to help the middle class and the expense of those getting subsidies.

Those of you using Obamacare, are the facts in the example accurate? And are you OK with them?
 
What this essentially means - is that under this tax-relief version of Trumpcare, 13 million Americans will lose healthcare insurance and healthcare premiums for everyone else will increase by ~10% every year for the next ten years.
 
So people get to pay higher taxes and higher premiums. Literally two policies that people get spanked on in elections. If there's a long political strategy here, I'm not seeing it.
 
poweRob said:
GOP really doesn't want to win elections much anymore. I mean we have the trump fiasco, tied with the Moore fiasco and while their at it... lets take away a lot of people's healthcare. I say go for it. Let the people see who you are and vote for or against such behavior it in the future. It's sad that the GOP is so desperate that they have to do this underhanded maneuver to repeal Obamacare by making it a part of their tax bill. But they must please their corporate masters before thinking about their constituents.

By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all

Despite nearly a year's worth of heartache, Republicans can't quit trying to repeal Obamacare.

Senate Republicans plan to include a repeal of the individual mandate -- a key piece of the Affordable Care Act -- in their tax reform efforts. It's a move that dramatically raises the stakes for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who are still looking for a single, substantial legislative accomplishment to deliver to the American people this year.​
Click to expand...

Why do you and others on the left have to lie? First of all, voters voted Republicans in over the last six years (plus Trump) because they wanted Obamacare repealed. Second of all, this tax legislation does not repeal Obamacare. It repeals the Obamacare mandate, which is not legal anyway.
 
Rogue Valley said:
What this essentially means - is that under this tax-relief version of Trumpcare, 13 million Americans will lose healthcare insurance and healthcare premiums for everyone else will increase by ~10% every year for the next ten years.
Click to expand...

You can't lose something you didn't want in the first place. 13 million people will not "lose" their healthcare. 13 million people will no longer be mandated to buy something they don't want. Think about it. If Obamacare was so great, why do 13 million people have to be FORCED to buy it?
 
Cardinal said:
So people get to pay higher taxes and higher premiums. Literally two policies that people get spanked on in elections. If there's a long political strategy here, I'm not seeing it.
Click to expand...

That's because you don't see it right in the first place. The huge majority will pay LOWER taxes. Hell, 47% pay zero federal income taxes now and that number would probably rise. And, anyone who gets subsidies for Obamacare will actually be paying less for Obamacare than they do now because the higher premiums rise, subsidies outpace the rise in premiums. That basically leaves the middle class who don't get subsidies screwed but they were already screwed under Obamacare and you lefties say that there are no such thing as Obamacare horror stories and screw everyone who is rich enough not to get subsidies.
 
chuckiechan said:
Because the corporate world is where the jobs are! What is wrong with jobs? More and better jobs will solve most of the Obamacare problems. The subsidy system is a rip off of the unsubsidised middle class.
Click to expand...

Absurd.
People cannot *afford* insurance on the wages they have. So you make some more jobs...they still can't afford it.
More jobs doesn't change the wages, and the ever-shrinking wages of the middle class relative to the ever-growing wealthy incomes.

Similarly, what you don't admit, is that government spending by in large, is going to create jobs no matter where they spend it. If they spend it on the military, it will largely go to jobs/wages. If they give it to the middle class..it's like wages but it gets spent back into the economy leading to higher revenues leading to...more jobs/wages. But it also may help them afford insurance, and it will also go to companies for jobs/wages...everyone wins, but more emphasis is on where it's needed.

Spending it just on the corporate elites? well, why would they create jobs with it? Why not just play market investing with it? Keep it parked overseas to avoid taxes. Invest outside the U.S., that's where a lot of investment goes...why invest in the U.S. which is a developed economy, when there are booming undeveloped economies where the margins are?
 
chuckiechan said:
The problem with Obamacare is at first glance it's a medical program. But when you look at it seriously, it's an income redistribution program at the expense of the middle class.

https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/out-of-pocket-maximum-limit/

he out-of-pocket limit doesn't include your monthly premiums. It also doesn't include anything you spend for services your plan doesn't cover.

For the 2017 plan year: The out-of-pocket limit for a Marketplace plan is $7,150 for an individual plan and $14,300 for a family plan.
For the 2016 plan year: The out-of-pocket limit for a 2016 Marketplace plan is $6,850 for an individual plan and $13,700 for a family plan.

Example of out-of-pocket maximum with high medical costs

Let's say you need surgery with allowable costs of $20,000, and the following figures apply to your health insurance plan.

Deductible: $1,300
Coinsurance: 20%
Out-of-pocket maximum: $4,400

You pay the first $1,300 of covered medical expenses (your deductible).

Your 20% coinsurance on the rest of the costs ($18,700) comes to $3,740.

So your total costs would be $5,040. That's $1,300 (your deductible) plus $3,740 (coinsurance).

But your out-of-pocket maximum is $4,400. Your insurance company pays all covered costs above $4,400 — for this surgery and any covered care you get for the rest of the plan year.

Generally, plans with lower monthly premiums have higher out-of-pocket limits. Plans with higher premiums usually have lower out-of-pocket maximums.
Click to expand...

This is starting too look like the old 80/20 plans before medial care cost got crazy expensive. So don't be so hard on the Republicans for trying to help the middle class and the expense of those getting subsidies.

Those of you using Obamacare, are the facts in the example accurate? And are you OK with them?
Click to expand...

Providing health care to those previously denied it is, necessarily, a matter of redistributing from the lucky to the unlucky. And, of course, reversing a policy that expanded health care is redistribution in reverse. You can’t make this reality go away.

Left to its own devices, a market economy won’t care for the sick unless they can pay for it; insurance can help up to a point, but insurance companies have no interest in covering people they suspect will get sick. So unfettered markets mean that health care goes only to those who are wealthy and/or healthy enough that they won’t need it often, and hence can get insurance.

If that’s a state of affairs you’re comfortable with, so be it. But the public doesn’t share your sentiments. Health care is an issue on which most people can easily imagine themselves in the position of those who, through no fault of their own, experience expensive medical problems, and feel that society should protect people like themselves from such straits.

The thing is, however, that guaranteeing health care comes with a cost. You can tell insurance companies that they can’t discriminate based on medical history, but that means higher premiums for the healthy, and you also create an incentive to stay uninsured until or unless you get sick, which pushes premiums even higher. So you have to regulate individuals as well as insurers, requiring that everyone sign up, the mandate, And since some people won’t be able to obey such a mandate, you need subsidies, which must be paid for out of taxes.

Before the passage and implementation of the ACA, Republicans could wave all this away by claiming that health reform could never work. And even now they’re busy telling lies about its collapse. But none of this will conceal mass loss of health care in the wake of Obamacare repeal via the tax-cut on the rich, with some of their most loyal voters among the biggest losers.
 
poweRob said:
GOP really doesn't want to win elections much anymore. I mean we have the trump fiasco, tied with the Moore fiasco and while their at it... lets take away a lot of people's healthcare. I say go for it. Let the people see who you are and vote for or against such behavior it in the future. It's sad that the GOP is so desperate that they have to do this underhanded maneuver to repeal Obamacare by making it a part of their tax bill. But they must please their corporate masters before thinking about their constituents.

By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all

Despite nearly a year's worth of heartache, Republicans can't quit trying to repeal Obamacare.

Senate Republicans plan to include a repeal of the individual mandate -- a key piece of the Affordable Care Act -- in their tax reform efforts. It's a move that dramatically raises the stakes for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who are still looking for a single, substantial legislative accomplishment to deliver to the American people this year.​
Click to expand...

It seems to me that there really are only two alternatives when it comes to Obamacare.(and this is by design, BTW) We can either repeal it and start over with something else or we can "fix" it by going to single payer.

The GOP would be finished for a generation if they opted to go the single payer route.
 
Moderate Right said:
Why do you and others on the left have to lie? First of all, voters voted Republicans in over the last six years (plus Trump) because they wanted Obamacare repealed. Second of all, this tax legislation does not repeal Obamacare. It repeals the Obamacare mandate, which is not legal anyway.
Click to expand...
Actually, voters expected Republicans to repeal and replace it with something better. That was the GOP/Trump promise. The reality was the GOP and Trump were lying and had nothing better and didn't plan on replacing the ACA with something better. The GOP merely wanted to repeal Obamacare, so that their rich donors could get a tax-cut that they demanded, or the GOP's bribe fund campaign contributions would dry up. The two bills that they floated had an approval of just 17%. The approval of Obamacare itself rose dramatically and now, more people are signing up than ever before.
 
MTAtech said:
Providing health care to those previously denied it is, necessarily, a matter of redistributing from the lucky to the unlucky. And, of course, reversing a policy that expanded health care is redistribution in reverse. You can’t make this reality go away.

Left to its own devices, a market economy won’t care for the sick unless they can pay for it; insurance can help up to a point, but insurance companies have no interest in covering people they suspect will get sick. So unfettered markets mean that health care goes only to those who are wealthy and/or healthy enough that they won’t need it often, and hence can get insurance.

If that’s a state of affairs you’re comfortable with, so be it. But the public doesn’t share your sentiments. Health care is an issue on which most people can easily imagine themselves in the position of those who, through no fault of their own, experience expensive medical problems, and feel that society should protect people like themselves from such straits.

The thing is, however, that guaranteeing health care comes with a cost. You can tell insurance companies that they can’t discriminate based on medical history, but that means higher premiums for the healthy, and you also create an incentive to stay uninsured until or unless you get sick, which pushes premiums even higher. So you have to regulate individuals as well as insurers, requiring that everyone sign up, the mandate, And since some people won’t be able to obey such a mandate, you need subsidies, which must be paid for out of taxes.

Before the passage and implementation of the ACA, Republicans could wave all this away by claiming that health reform could never work. And even now they’re busy telling lies about its collapse. But none of this will conceal mass loss of health care in the wake of Obamacare repeal via the tax-cut on the rich, with some of their most loyal voters among the biggest losers.
Click to expand...

So you say "Yes, the middle class should subsidize the poor to the point that premiums are so high the middle classs cannot use the plans themselves due to out of pocket requirements."

That is the argument in a nutshell. I would argue that getting off the back of business and creating jobs will go a long way to reducing the need for subsidies. In New York city where wages are higher, it's not a huge deal to cough up the $4400. Maybe 5% of your salary (~ $88k). But in much of America ($45k), wages are much lower and you are paying a much higher percentage of your salary to support the underclass and great expense to themselves.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
It seems to me that there really are only two alternatives when it comes to Obamacare.(and this is by design, BTW) We can either repeal it and start over with something else or we can "fix" it by going to single payer.

The GOP would be finished for a generation if they opted to go the single payer route.
Click to expand...
Or, we can fix the ACA by addressing the two areas that Americans complain about most: cost of premiums and deductibles. To fix that requires more subsidies. If you thing the GOP is going to increase the ACA tax on rich people to pay for reducing the cost of premiums and deductibles for the middle class, I have a perpetual motion car in my garage that I'll be willing to sell you.
 
chuckiechan said:
So you say "Yes, the middle class should subsidize the poor to the point that premiums are so high the middle classs cannot use the plans themselves due to out of pocket requirements."

That is the argument in a nutshell. I would argue that getting off the back of business and creating jobs will go a long way to reducing the need for subsidies. In New York city where wages are higher, it's not a huge deal to cough up the $4400. Maybe 5% of your salary (~ $88k). But in much of America ($45k), wages are much lower and you are paying a much higher percentage of your salary to support the underclass and great expense to themselves.
Click to expand...

You are being dishonest. The middle class doesn't pay the ACA taxes, the rich do.
 
MTAtech said:
Or, we can fix the ACA by addressing the two areas that Americans complain about most: cost of premiums and deductibles. To fix that requires more subsidies. If you thing the GOP is going to increase the ACA tax on rich people to pay for reducing the cost of premiums and deductibles for the middle class, I have a perpetual motion car in my garage that I'll be willing to sell you.
Click to expand...

Tax the rich is the solution to everything, I guess.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Tax the rich is the solution to everything, I guess.
Click to expand...
Not everything -- but in a country in which income has become more and more concentrated into a tiny sliver at the top, it is rational to tax those who have done very well so as to provide for those that have been stagnant for 30 years. The reality is that these taxes haven't cramped the lifestyles of the rich and famous.

With all the moral fights to be waged, why do you choose to battle for the right of the rich to benefit from lower taxes?
 
Rogue Valley said:
What this essentially means - is that under this tax-relief version of Trumpcare, 13 million Americans will lose healthcare insurance and healthcare premiums for everyone else will increase by ~10% every year for the next ten years.
Click to expand...

Temporary tax relief, IIRC it expires in 2026.
Mind you the Corp cuts do not.
 
chuckiechan said:
Because the corporate world is where the jobs are! What is wrong with jobs? More and better jobs will solve most of the Obamacare problems. The subsidy system is a rip off of the unsubsidised middle class.
Click to expand...

Not really. We've basically been lowering the tax rates for investors and big business for 40 years. During that time, the middle class has shrunk and wages have been stagnant when inflation is factored in.

Face it, corporations want profit. Enemies of profit? Higher head count and higher wages.

Did you ever get a wage increase because your company got a nice tax cut or loophole?
 
Moderate Right said:
Why do you and others on the left have to lie? First of all, voters voted Republicans in over the last six years (plus Trump) because they wanted Obamacare repealed. Second of all, this tax legislation does not repeal Obamacare. It repeals the Obamacare mandate, which is not legal anyway.
Click to expand...

Republican voters want Obamacare repealed. But they magically don't want the ACA repealed. Extremely low information voters.

It's going to effect red state constituents more than blue so... good luck with that.
 
Moderate Right said:
You can't lose something you didn't want in the first place. 13 million people will not "lose" their healthcare. 13 million people will no longer be mandated to buy something they don't want. Think about it. If Obamacare was so great, why do 13 million people have to be FORCED to buy it?
Click to expand...
Holy **** what evil ****bird managed to convince you all those poor people just don't want health insurance.
 
MTAtech said:
Actually, voters expected Republicans to repeal and replace it with something better. That was the GOP/Trump promise. The reality was the GOP and Trump were lying and had nothing better and didn't plan on replacing the ACA with something better. The GOP merely wanted to repeal Obamacare, so that their rich donors could get a tax-cut that they demanded, or the GOP's bribe fund campaign contributions would dry up. The two bills that they floated had an approval of just 17%. The approval of Obamacare itself rose dramatically and now, more people are signing up than ever before.
Click to expand...

So, you're saying that you want Obamacare repealed and replaced with something better? Why all of the resistance then?
 
poweRob said:
GOP really doesn't want to win elections much anymore. I mean we have the trump fiasco, tied with the Moore fiasco and while their at it... lets take away a lot of people's healthcare. I say go for it. Let the people see who you are and vote for or against such behavior it in the future. It's sad that the GOP is so desperate that they have to do this underhanded maneuver to repeal Obamacare by making it a part of their tax bill. But they must please their corporate masters before thinking about their constituents.

By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all

Despite nearly a year's worth of heartache, Republicans can't quit trying to repeal Obamacare.

Senate Republicans plan to include a repeal of the individual mandate -- a key piece of the Affordable Care Act -- in their tax reform efforts. It's a move that dramatically raises the stakes for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, who are still looking for a single, substantial legislative accomplishment to deliver to the American people this year.​
Click to expand...

This Senate bill has nothing to do with taxes or Obamacare. The Senate GOP won't pass it.

This individual mandate repeal addition simply gives Senators an excuse to vote no. (McCain? Where are you?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom