Printable View
For anyone that thinks a co-op or anything else the government comes up with that promises you an ability to choose your doctor or to keep your own all you need to do is look at the GSEs and their original intent. They were originally created as an alternative to keep prices down in housing and they were never to be the monopoly. How'd that work out?
For those who are unfamiliar, he is referencing Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, which are Government Sponsored Entities.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
Fannie Mae is the Federal National Mortgage Association.
Freddie Mac is the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.
Of note is that Fannie and Freddy were grossly mismanaged by their officers, congressmen, and senators. It is for this reason that people are justifiably skittish about the government taking on any additional role in healthcare. They cannot properly manage Medicare as it is.
Franklin Raines was a close Obama adviser, and never actually held a formal title of "economic adviser" to Obama. That said, Raines mismanaged Fannie Mae into deep financial trouble while making some Nine Million Dollars in pay and bonuses. All from a government sponsored entity, no less. Two other figures were closely linked to the Obama administration during the runup to the election, but were virtually ignored by the legacy media.
I think one of the reasons not the outcry from the health coomunity is, they realize if the government gets a hold of it, there will be tons of money for them. They know the government will screw it up, and that will be great money to them now, and long into the future.
OK, help me out here. In my 7:00am - 3:30pm job, I have about $350.00 deducted every 4 weeks for health insurance. What will I pay for universal?
I have a family of 5. My wife and I are under 45years of age.
Raines was the Chief in the Clinton's OMB office also. He cost them $6.3 billion in accounting fraud which prompted mortgage backed securities to be focused on by his predecessor. MBS's started under Raines though. Raines made $90 million while at Fannie.Quote:
Originally Posted by timebuilder
Yeah the never ending pot of gold called the tax liability. The government can and will just tax what it needs. The problem is it always needs more than it taxes... The US government should be the illustrated example beside the definition of slippery slope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dowadudda
It's free haven't you head... The problem again is not what you'll see up front. It's what happens when the government miscalculates and now has the ability to tax what it needs. The proverbial hand in the pocket... Once it's there it'll be a cold day in hell when you get to remove it. Once the paperwork is in place for the government to tax what it needs and people are dependent upon it it will be virtually impossible to vote it out or decrease funds for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by absoair
You are not paying $350 a month for 5. You are paying much more, just indirectly. Average spending in US per person is roughly $6,500 per year. Your employer pays all that, and just makes your salary lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by absoair
If you make an average wage, and have a relatively large family, you stand the most to benefit from all of this. Someone making lots of money with 1 or 2 people on the tax form stand to benefit less.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2907
So basically if you're a business owner or someone who's already paying the tax liability for the rest of America (the upper 42% of the work force), guess what, you'll be paying even more for the rest of the country...Quote:
Many employers that do offer coverage also would be subject to this requirement. Workers who would have to pay more than 13 percent of their income for their share of the premium costs under their employer’s plan, and who have family incomes below 300 percent of the poverty line, could receive a subsidy to purchase coverage through the exchange. Their employers, however, would then be billed for those subsidies.
As a result, firms that offer coverage generally would be worse off under this provision than under the “play-or-pay” provisions of the House health care bill or the bill that the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee has approved.
One of the problems with the house bills is the uncertainty created in the vague language used. For example, a requirement for "deficit neutrality" could result in your taxes being raised. Mine too.Quote:
Originally Posted by absoair
One of the big dangers is that employers who are under economic pressure could decide to drop your "good" coverage in place of a "public option" plan, where your coverage is "not so good." This is the secret of rhetoric like "we will let you keep your private insurance."
Sure, until your private insurance no longer exists!
And, this will not cause your wages to rise in the coming inflationary environment.
Just a few thoughts on Health Insurance.
In 2007 there were 46.3 million people in the United States without health Insurance. That was 2 years ago when the economy was rolling along. Now in the middle of a recession that is pretty severe by any standards. With almost 10% of the workforce out of work how many people are now without coverage?
Why do we tie our health insurance to our jobs, the days when you got a job and stayed until retirement are over.
If one person through no fault of there own lose their house or a lifetime worth of savings then we need to rethink our healthcare policy.
If any person dies prematurely because they can't afford the treatment what does that say about us as human beings. I personally find this kind of behavior criminal, and I do believe that this has happened and will continue to occur until we deal with it.
If everyone was covered, would not the parents be sure the kids got all there shots and also make sure that Grandma and Grandpa got regular checkups and that the practice of preventive medicine would become much improved. By finding and identifying problems early the costs will always be much less expensive. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Thanks, I forgot the zero. I think Arlen Specter does that, too. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
An average worker with a large family will only benefit in theory, because there are so many "other" such families that will be getting into lines that will stretch out of waiting rooms. No additional doctors will suddenly appear when the patients appear, and the average worker will be able to keep his private insurance, until that coverage is no longer offered by the employer or the insurance company decides they cannot continue to offer policies. The COBRA cost when your employer opts into the public option plan will be staggering, so that's how you get forced into the public plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuji