Obama Care Yet Again

mdram · May 24, 2011

anexanhume said:
...

There is no tax burden to pass along. Under a UHC system, the tax burden is directly on the tax payer in the case of medical coverage. It is never on the company. A lot of US companies don't even pay taxes through creative accounting, never mind the fact they aren't responsible for medical coverage. They get to write off any and all compensation to you as an employee as a business expense. No taxes on compensation for labor, in any form. Google only pays a 2% rate, for instance.

You end up paying for it in ANY scenario. The question is whether you want a private entity profiting off of your medical care or the government paying for it, covering the cost of its employees to do so, and that's the end of the story.

and you say my taxes wont go up, your contradicting yourself

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
and you say my taxes wont go up, your contradicting yourself

I never said that. Please quote it directly.

In fact, I said the exact opposite.

anexanhume said:
Your overall tax % goes up, but your take home pay stays the same.

You are begrudging the word tax without actually showing any understanding of what it means. Taxes = bad may be cute to George of the Jungle, but it doesn't convey any sense of reality to the situation.

mdram · May 24, 2011

anexanhume said:
I never said that. Please quote it directly.

In fact, I said the exact opposite.

You are begrudging the word tax without actually showing any understanding of what it means. Taxes = bad may be cute to George of the Jungle, but it doesn't convey any sense of reality to the situation.

ok, i did misquote
but you math seems to be that new math where 2+2 can equal 3, 4 or 5
tax percent goes up, my taxes go up.
your assuming employers will increase the pay based on the previous health care costs. and i doubt that will happen. they will use that to cover thier own increased tax rate for hc

and this is not a UHC, its a mandate saying you buy health care or you pay a fine. and if you cant afford it we will pay for you

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
ok, i did misquote
but you math seems to be that new math where 2+2 can equal 3, 4 or 5
tax percent goes up, my taxes go up.
your assuming employers will increase the pay based on the previous health care costs. and i doubt that will happen. they will use that to cover thier own increased tax rate for hc

and this is not a UHC, its a mandate saying you buy health care or you pay a fine. and if you cant afford it we will pay for you

We've been arguing the hypotheticals of UHC for a while, not the mandate system our country is currently functioning on. I assumed you bought into this argument given my deliberate phrasing and constant use of UHC, which our current system is not.

Also, with the current system, business are only taxed if they do not provide healthcare coverage. That tax is a fine for not doing so. If you work for a company that provides healthcare to all its employees, it's not relevant to you.

mdram · May 24, 2011

oh hypotheticals, i thought you were talking about obamacare, some people do refer to it as UHC

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
oh hypotheticals, i thought you were talking about obamacare, some people do refer to it as UHC

That's unfortunate. UHC should be reserved for single payer coverage.

ElasticNinja · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
no, im looking at it as reality. companies pass the tax burden along, one way or another i will end up paying for it.
your looking at it through rose colored glasses as the saying goes.
in theory what you say is nice, but its not how economics work in the real world

The thing is is that UHC will reduce costs to you, your employer, and/or the government without raising costs for any.
The money saved would be great for low and low middle income families, and small & medium business's, and due to increased tax take, lower government debt.

There is a very good reason that your average conservative party across the developed world supports UHC.

log1c · May 24, 2011

anexanhume,
I notice how you are trying to persuade one person why a UHC system would work, and it's funny because the president is trying to persuade the whole country why eveyone should have healthcare, and to their prevail, most of their arguments relate to mdram's argument of why should we pay higher taxes for people who don't work. That is why I don't see this country transitioning from our current health care system to a UHC sytem anytime soon, or to Obama's reformed healthcare

mdram · May 24, 2011

problem is when you only have half of the country paying taxes, they dont want to be burdened any further

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
problem is when you only have half of the country paying taxes, they dont want to be burdened any further

You can't expect people making minimum wage to pay taxes. A lot of america lives below the poverty line yet has two working adults in it.

By comparison, Australia's minimum wage is 15/hr and they have around 5% unemployment.

mdram · May 24, 2011

anexanhume said:
You can't expect people making minimum wage to pay taxes. A lot of america lives below the poverty line yet has two working adults in it.

By comparison, Australia's minimum wage is 15/hr and they have around 5% unemployment.

maybe pay no taxes, but people actually get money from the goverment via earned income, a subsidy. they pay 0 through the year, and end up with a big check at tax time.
poverty line for family of 4 is currently 22k, or 1 of them working at min wage 40 hours a week. simple fix, both work

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
maybe pay no taxes, but people actually get money from the goverment via earned income, a subsidy. they pay 0 through the year, and end up with a big check at tax time.
poverty line for family of 4 is currently 22k, or 1 of them working at min wage 40 hours a week. simple fix, both work

That assumes one can find a full time job. That's not always the case, as an employer often has to provide benefits over a certain number of hours worked. It's also impractical. Both working may necessitate child care, which the family cannot afford.

mdram · May 24, 2011

anexanhume said:
That assumes one can find a full time job. That's not always the case, as an employer often has to provide benefits over a certain number of hours worked. It's also impractical. Both working may necessitate child care, which the family cannot afford.

therein lies the biggest problem.
if you are making so little you are below the poverty line, you should really rethink starting a family until you can better afford it.

schedules can be arranged oftentimes so that one parent is home while the other is working

if you cant find a full time job, get 2 part times

this is how our parents and grandparents did it. but we have become a lazy society that would rather have the government provide for us then do it ourselves

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
therein lies the biggest problem.
if you are making so little you are below the poverty line, you should really rethink starting a family until you can better afford it.

schedules can be arranged oftentimes so that one parent is home while the other is working

if you cant find a full time job, get 2 part times

this is how our parents and grandparents did it. but we have become a lazy society that would rather have the government provide for us then do it ourselves

You assume this is all possible with 9% unemployment. It simply isn't. And many find themselves in these situations after the fact. They have a family of 4 with a good income and the rug is pulled out from under them and then they struggle to make ends meet. Not everyone is working at McDonald's on one income and decides to start popping out kids.

Our parents and grandparents faced a lot less competitive world economy. That's why our manufacturing was booming in the 50's. Other people have caught up, and now we ship jobs overseas.

mdram · May 24, 2011

this is not a new situation, its been like this for years, its just getting worse with the current economy.

and people that really want to work do find jobs. i know some that have, i did twice(one was a hold over after a company closed, the other was a better paying ect)

is it hard? yes, but we do what we have to do until things pick up

ElasticNinja · May 24, 2011

So mdram, why are you opposed to Universal Healthcare?

mdram · May 24, 2011

i am opposed to the government taking over that much of our economy
under their plan i see rationing, higher costs, fewer doctors

the free market can fix the issue, if they let it.
allow sales across state borders, allow more competition
a family of 4 should be paying half as much as a family of 8, currently its the same

but at the same time the people have to rethink what they want from health care
everyone wants a 0 copay and no deductible.
for young/healthy people that go to the doctor once every 3 years a high copay high deductible is more suited to their needs. maybe as an hra or hsa.

no there are plenty of ways to fix the system without the government getting thier hands into it

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
i am opposed to the government taking over that much of our economy
under their plan i see rationing, higher costs, fewer doctors

the free market can fix the issue, if they let it.
allow sales across state borders, allow more competition
a family of 4 should be paying half as much as a family of 8, currently its the same

but at the same time the people have to rethink what they want from health care
everyone wants a 0 copay and no deductible.
for young/healthy people that go to the doctor once every 3 years a high copay high deductible is more suited to their needs. maybe as an hra or hsa.

no there are plenty of ways to fix the system without the government getting thier hands into it

First world governments across the world have demonstrated UHC is preferable to a private system.

I'm also curious as to how you see rationing, higher costs and fewer doctors when that's generally not the case in countries where UHC is implemented.

mdram · May 24, 2011

anexanhume said:
First world governments across the world have demonstrated UHC is preferable to a private system.

I'm also curious as to how you see rationing, higher costs and fewer doctors when that's generally not the case in countries where UHC is implemented.

BBC NEWS | Health | Rationing care from limited funds

mdram · May 24, 2011

this is the line that worries me

"If you get an extra year of life for less than

nlsme · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
maybe pay no taxes, but people actually get money from the goverment via earned income, a subsidy. they pay 0 through the year, and end up with a big check at tax time.
poverty line for family of 4 is currently 22k, or 1 of them working at min wage 40 hours a week. simple fix, both work

Umm, min wage 40 hrs a weak is less than 15k. When the top 1% holds 40% of the nations wealth, I dont wanna hear complaints about what they pay in taxes. Especially when they pay a lesser percent than I do in taxes.

anexanhume · May 24, 2011

You act as if rationing doesn't already occur in the US. In the US, the private insurance companies decide who does and doesn't get treatment. That means the rich get their treatments while the poor don't. That's how it's rationed. The difference is that one can pay to get treatment in the UK if one elects. The poor still have the system to fall back on. They don't have that here.

ElasticNinja · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
BBC NEWS | Health | Rationing care from limited funds

to get this out of the way:

The UK spends 40% per person what the US does on healthcare

Now, the UK has a Socialist system, which is almost entirely funded by the state
This means that people have little medical expenses of their own, but instead pay through their taxes
This means that, as medical costs increase (aging population) , increases in expenditure have to funded by tax increases as opposed to premium increases in an insurance based UHC system, two teired system, or free for all "system".
Now tax increases are never popular, so this is a problem of the socialist system
Presumably, as the UK economy gets back on track around 2015, tax increases will be feasible.
Still the public have chosen the road of frozen health expenditure and no income tax increases for now.

ElasticNinja · May 24, 2011

mdram said:
i am opposed to the government taking over that much of our economy

They don't need to take over it
The system would involve the government regulating Insurance companies and subsidizing premiums
The Private hospitals and Insurers would still be there

mdram said:
under their plan i see rationing, higher costs, fewer doctors

As others have pointed out, its in Insurers interests to prevent giving care
Do you not see how the US is paying triple what it should be for its getting
I know most western European have enough doctors, even if they get 3/5ths the pay

mdram said:
the free market can fix the issue, if they let it.
allow sales across state borders, allow more competition

This will slash spending by 70%?
Given that you should be paying about $2200 per person for what you gget yet you pay over $7200

mdram said:
no there are plenty of ways to fix the system without the government getting thier hands into it

Who else will fix it?
The public can't without the government
The Insurers luuuurv the current system
The medical professionals enjoy their oversized pay cheques

Bob Maxey · May 24, 2011

Please forgive me, but the health care systems in place in other, far off lands is not applicable to this thread. Not sure if it is my place as the OP to complain, but forget the UK and talk about this country.

Sorry to be a futz nubbin, but it can be difficult to discuss the issue if we bring up other systems.

Bob

Obama Care Yet Again

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Expert

Android Enthusiast

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Android Expert

Android Enthusiast

Member

Android Enthusiast

Android Enthusiast

Android Expert

Member

Android Expert

Android Expert

Android Expert

BEST TECH IN 2023

Smartphones

Best Android Phones

Upcoming

Best iPhones

Upcoming

Tablets

Best Tablets

Upcoming

Laptops

Best Laptops

Upcoming

Televisions

Best TVs

Upcoming

Game Consoles

Best Game Consoles

Upcoming

Wearables

Best Wearables

Upcoming

Smart Home

Smart Home Tech

Upcoming

Similar threads