US uninsured rate continues to plummet, youth signing up most
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:51:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  US uninsured rate continues to plummet, youth signing up most
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: US uninsured rate continues to plummet, youth signing up most  (Read 2306 times)
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2015, 10:42:14 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I, a middle class tax payer, got walloped terribly by Obamacare this year.

I do not have health care through an employer so I was forced to buy a plan off a state-run exchange. I was forced to take a significant tax break as a subsidy to cover the cost of my plan. Then, to make matters worse, I was forced to deduct the amount of money I spent on health insurance from my income.

What a terrible world I find myself living in. I now have quality health insurance for just over $100 per month, which is -- sadly -- less than I was paying when I had an employer cover part of the bill for me. What a terrible deal Obamacare is! Repeal it, quick -- I can't stand finally having access to an affordable health care plan Sad
Logged
tik 🪀✨
ComradeCarter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,499
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2015, 10:48:11 AM »

The above is quite a mouthful, and you lost me with the loss of dependents thing, but moving right along, do you believe any form of taxation, the proceeds of which are used for redistributive purposes, is immoral?

Why would you retreat to an obscure political talking point?

The middle class just got hammered with a 1% of AGI or $95 per month (whichever is higher) surtax for non-coverage. Rather than pay the tax, they removed dependents from their tax return. Those dependency exemptions were granted according to the ability to pay concept. Other taxpayers, who aren't covered by their employers, thus, don't receive the same tax benefits for healthcare, were forced to eat the higher tax bill.

Meanwhile the upper middle and upper classes are left to their own devices because they receive tax-free healthcare compensation from their employers.

Wealth is being distributed from the middle fifth to the bottom fifth. Does that seem like an effective method of spreading the wealth around? Only the brain-dead American electorate could cheerlead something so patently stupid. Only clueless Americans could allow elected officials to plea federal poverty, when we have more than enough money to solve the problem, if only we'll stop binge spending of counter-productive programs that make us less filthy-rich.

Obamacare is surely one of the greatest failures in our history. We could buy healthcare for everyone, but we don't. We could easily empower everyone to buy their own healthcare, but we don't. Instead, we vote for civic malfeasance and moral debauchery on an increasingly grand scale. 

Well you have a point about employee based plans, and the system should certainly be more means tested, but I think you missed the moral hazard aspect - that those who are not insured, when they have a real need, burden the system typically as freeloaders, at taxpayer and the expense of those who have insurance, because some of the premiums are then diverted to offset some of the free loader expense that the care giver organizations are saddled with. What is conservative or moral about that, in anyone's universe?

Just because someone does something amoral doesn't mean a non-judgmental response by society is amoral. That is to say, two wrongs don't make a right. If someone can afford health insurance but doesn't purchase it, then falls ill and we all have to pay for it, well, the moral principle of helping someone survive is more important than their irresponsible, immoral behaviour. I suppose this idea completely boils down to ideology, but, you know..
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2015, 10:57:47 AM »

Well you have a point about employee based plans, and the system should certainly be more means tested, but I think you missed the moral hazard aspect - that those who are not insured, when they have a real need, burden the system typically as freeloaders, at taxpayer and the expense of those who have insurance, because some of the premiums are then diverted to offset some of the free loader expense that the care giver organizations are saddled with. What is conservative or moral about that, in anyone's universe?

Paying a premium on someone's behalf doesn't magically reduce the cost burden they shift to other people. The moral hazard is forcing middle America to cover the marginal cost by stripping away their tax benefits, particularly the tax benefits they get for taking care of their uninsured children who are no longer qualifying children.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2015, 10:59:44 AM »
« Edited: April 17, 2015, 06:45:10 PM by True Federalist »

I, a middle class tax payer, got walloped terribly by Obamacare this year.

I do not have health care through an employer so I was forced to buy a plan off a state-run exchange. I was forced to take a significant tax break as a subsidy to cover the cost of my plan. Then, to make matters worse, I was forced to deduct the amount of money I spent on health insurance from my income.

What a terrible world I find myself living in. I now have quality health insurance for just over $100 per month, which is -- sadly -- less than I was paying when I had an employer cover part of the bill for me. What a terrible deal Obamacare is! Repeal it, quick -- I can't stand finally having access to an affordable health care plan Sad

You are one of the people I'm talking about. You got subsidies. You couldn't care less, if they came from your middle class neighbor across the street. As long as you qualified, you're happy.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2015, 11:00:35 AM »

jao
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2015, 11:20:33 AM »
« Edited: April 17, 2015, 06:59:14 PM by True Federalist »

You are one of the people I'm talking about. You got subsidies. You couldn't care less, if they came from your middle class neighbor across the street. As long as you qualified, you're happy.

If some "middle class neighbor" who makes twice as much money me is living across the street and is somehow having financial woes, I would not only "couldn't care less" about their situation but I would openly ridicule them.  How could someone so incompetent that they couldn't live off 190% my take home pay possibly have a job that makes 200% more than me? If that person exists, thank god the IRS is swooping in to put some of that drool's money away for something that matters like the fate of the healthcare industry.

(Edited because it quoted a moderated post so as to match the moderation. - TF)
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: April 17, 2015, 11:27:50 AM »

My middle class neighbor across the street is on Medicare, the moocher.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: April 17, 2015, 11:38:01 AM »

My middle class neighbor across the street is on Medicare, the moocher.

The description of the person AD feels sympathetic to is real a magic bullet of a fool. A pool of ambitious small business owners that can somehow turn a hell of a profit but can't seem to balance a checkbook.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 17, 2015, 11:45:43 AM »

My middle class neighbor across the street is on Medicare, the moocher.

The description of the person AD feels sympathetic to is real a magic bullet of a fool. A pool of ambitious small business owners that can somehow turn a hell of a profit but can't seem to balance a checkbook.

Ironically enough, I'm a small business owner. Which is why I had to buy my own insurance off an exchange in the first place.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 17, 2015, 12:31:24 PM »

The description of the person AD feels sympathetic to is real a magic bullet of a fool. A pool of ambitious small business owners that can somehow turn a hell of a profit but can't seem to balance a checkbook.

You're only underlining your own lack of comprehension. I've explained numerous times that Obamacare has no method to its madness. Some people are randomly penalized. Other people get handouts. Young men pay for mammograms, and old women pay for maternity care. On balance, I've seen far more tax penalties and bad news than happy 1095-A recipients.

Obamacare has no equity. It merely establishes a sort of hell that induces a behavioral response, and no one really gives a damn, as long as the uninsured graph trends downward, and the insurance companies make more money. If they lose money, they've rigged Obamacare to subsidize their losses.

This country really is becoming an Animal Farm. There is no equity in the system, and the only people who refuse to tolerate mistreatment are the wealthy and upwardly mobile. The sheeple complain about conspiracy, but the only conspiracy is their own incompetence.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 17, 2015, 12:34:23 PM »

Ironically enough, I'm a small business owner. Which is why I had to buy my own insurance off an exchange in the first place.

If you were a small business owner of any repute, you'd know that the exchanges existed long before Obamacare. Maybe you didn't have access in Massachusetts, where you wrecked your system so badly that you had to pass Romneycare, first.

Obamacare has simply dictated what products are allowed to be sold on an exchange.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 17, 2015, 12:48:12 PM »

lol
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 17, 2015, 03:16:12 PM »

The above is quite a mouthful, and you lost me with the loss of dependents thing, but moving right along, do you believe any form of taxation, the proceeds of which are used for redistributive purposes, is immoral?

Why would you retreat to an obscure political talking point?

The middle class just got hammered with a 1% of AGI or $95 per month (whichever is higher) surtax for non-coverage. Rather than pay the tax, they removed dependents from their tax return. Those dependency exemptions were granted according to the ability to pay concept. Other taxpayers, who aren't covered by their employers, thus, don't receive the same tax benefits for healthcare, were forced to eat the higher tax bill.

Meanwhile the upper middle and upper classes are left to their own devices because they receive tax-free healthcare compensation from their employers.

Wealth is being distributed from the middle fifth to the bottom fifth. Does that seem like an effective method of spreading the wealth around? Only the brain-dead American electorate could cheerlead something so patently stupid. Only clueless Americans could allow elected officials to plea federal poverty, when we have more than enough money to solve the problem, if only we'll stop binge spending of counter-productive programs that make us less filthy-rich.

Obamacare is surely one of the greatest failures in our history. We could buy healthcare for everyone, but we don't. We could easily empower everyone to buy their own healthcare, but we don't. Instead, we vote for civic malfeasance and moral debauchery on an increasingly grand scale. 

Well you have a point about employee based plans, and the system should certainly be more means tested, but I think you missed the moral hazard aspect - that those who are not insured, when they have a real need, burden the system typically as freeloaders, at taxpayer and the expense of those who have insurance, because some of the premiums are then diverted to offset some of the free loader expense that the care giver organizations are saddled with. What is conservative or moral about that, in anyone's universe?

Just because someone does something amoral doesn't mean a non-judgmental response by society is amoral. That is to say, two wrongs don't make a right. If someone can afford health insurance but doesn't purchase it, then falls ill and we all have to pay for it, well, the moral principle of helping someone survive is more important than their irresponsible, immoral behaviour. I suppose this idea completely boils down to ideology, but, you know..

Of course you treat the freeloaders, but better yet, cull down the number of freeloaders in the first instance, by well, taxing them, or penalizing them, or something, to buy health insurance, subsidized on a means tested basis. Just why this aspect of the whole contretemps can possibly be controversial, escapes me. The wheels of the entire system don't gear together well, but the basic concept is good.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 17, 2015, 07:24:01 PM »

On balance, I've seen far more tax penalties and bad news than happy 1095-A recipients.

Yeah, the people who chose to forgo insurance (or somehow despite all the hype, weren't aware of it) were certainly unhappy come tax time.  (I did some part time work at a tax prep place a friend of mine runs this year, so my knowledge here is first hand.)  On the other hand, of those who did get insurance thru an exchange, how happy they were was due primarily to how good their insurance company was.  Those who picked the absolutely cheapest option tended to be unhappy, but that had nothing to do with the subsidies they got but rather getting screwed over out of network considerations, especially when providers treating them at an in-network facility were out of network.  That's something that definitely needs fixing in insurance, and not just for Obamacare insurance.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 12 queries.