U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:00 AM
 
1,643 posts, read 1,536,865 times
Reputation: 1220

Advertisements

  • So much for "Oh, it's only going to affect those people who don't have insurance, no one else will have to pay"
  • A 3.8% surtax on "investment income" when your adjusted gross income is more than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint-filers). What is "investment income?" Dividends, interest, rent, capital gains, annuities, house sales, partnerships, etc. Taxes on dividends will rise from 15% to 18.8%--if Congress extends the Bush tax cuts. If Congress does not extend the Bush tax cuts, taxes on dividends will rise from 15% to a shocking 43.8%. (WSJ)
  • A 0.9% surtax on Medicare taxes for those making $200,000 or more ($250,000 joint). You already pay Medicare tax of 1.45%, and your employer pays another 1.45% for you (unless you're self-employed, in which case you pay the whole 2.9% yourself). Next year, your Medicare bill will be 2.35%. (WSJ)
  • Flexible Spending Account contributions will be capped at $2,500. Currently, there is no tax-related limit on how much you can set aside pre-tax to pay for medical expenses. Next year, there will be. If you have been socking away, say, $10,000 in your FSA to pay medical bills, you'll have to cut that to $2,500. (ATR.org)
  • The itemized-deduction hurdle for medical expenses is going up to $10,000. Right now, any medical expenses over $7,500 per year are deductible. Next year, that hurdle will be $10,000. (ATR.org)
  • The penalty on non-medical withdrawals from Healthcare Savings Accounts is now 20% instead of 10%. That's twice the penalty that applies to annuities, IRAs, and other tax-free vehicles. (ATR.org)
  • A tax of 10% on indoor tanning services. This has been in place for two years, since the summer of 2010. (ATR.org)
  • A 40% tax on "Cadillac Health Care Plans" starting in 2018.Those whose employers pay for all or most of comprehensive healthcare plans (costing $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for families) will have to pay a 40% tax on the amount their employer pays. The 2018 start date is said to have been a gift to unions, which often have comprehensive plans. (ATR.org)
  • A"Medicine Cabinet Tax" that eliminates the ability to pay for over-the-counter medicines from a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account. This started in January 2011. (ATR.org)
  • A "penalty" tax for those who don't buy health insurance. This will phase in from 2014-2016. It will range from $695 per person to about $4,700 per person, depending on your income. (More details here.)
  • A tax on medical devices costing more than $100. Starting in 2013, medical device manufacturers will have to pay a 2.3% excise tax on medical equipment. This is expected to raise the cost of medical procedures. (Breitbart.com)
So those are some of the new taxes you'll be paying that will help pay for Obamacare.
Any big ones I've missed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,010,658 times
Reputation: 5600
I don't see anything unreasonable with those taxes. Most of them fall on the upper brackets that have been getting a deal on taxes for ten years.

Also, what's the problem with the penalty tax for those who don't buy health insurance? Those people choose to have no health insurance but when they have an illness show up to ER and expect the rest of us to pay for their care. Why should they get a free ride and shirk personal responsibility? Isn't that what conservatives preach, personal responsibility?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:11 AM
 
Location: White House, TN
5,145 posts, read 3,604,139 times
Reputation: 3230
This one act would be enough for me to not vote for ANY president, no matter how good they had been before.

Obama was doing poorly in my mind before this. With ObamaCare, he's the worst president the US has ever had.

Oh and since it's 11:11, I'm going to make a wish that ObamaCare is abolished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:15 AM
 
630 posts, read 628,447 times
Reputation: 363
So instead of them showing up at the ER for a free ride we just hand em the free ride. Nothing will change, people were getting free care before obamascare and now we will just hand it to em
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:16 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,010,658 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawa1992 View Post
This one act would be enough for me to not vote for ANY president, no matter how good they had been before.

Obama was doing poorly in my mind before this. With ObamaCare, he's the worst president the US has ever had.

Oh and since it's 11:11, I'm going to make a wish that ObamaCare is abolished.
What specifically in the ACA do you not like?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:16 AM
 
Location: John & Ken-ville
13,692 posts, read 15,112,510 times
Reputation: 9486
More taxes. Just what we need.

Time for another Boston Tea Party.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:37 AM
 
Location: White House, TN
5,145 posts, read 3,604,139 times
Reputation: 3230
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
What specifically in the ACA do you not like?
The 40% tax on "Cadillac Health Care Plans" is the biggest one here. That segment alone would sink any president three letter grades in my book. In Obama's case, he's already at an F----.

And the panoply of other taxes. Good grief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:42 AM
 
17,749 posts, read 15,023,452 times
Reputation: 6377
Is it just the taxes you care about?

What about refusing dubious preventative medicine? What about the justification for curtailing freedom? Can I force fat people, reckless drivers and smokers to change their behavior?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:53 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,010,658 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawa1992 View Post
The 40% tax on "Cadillac Health Care Plans" is the biggest one here. That segment alone would sink any president three letter grades in my book. In Obama's case, he's already at an F----.

And the panoply of other taxes. Good grief.
Do you have such a plan? Because the tax starts in 2018.

From Wiki:
Quote:
Criticisms of these plans generally center around the fact that small or nonexistent co-pays, deductibles, or caps encourage the overuse of medical care, driving the cost up for the uninsured or those on other plans, that some say necessitates a Cadillac tax.[citation needed]

A study published in Health Affairs in December 2009 found that high-cost health plans do not provide unusually rich benefits to enrollees. The researchers found that only 3.7% of the variation in the cost of family coverage in employer-sponsored health plans is attributable to differences in the actuarial value of benefits. Only 6.1% of the variation is attributable to the combination of benefit design and plan type (e.g., PPO, HMO, etc.). The employer's industry and regional variations in health care costs explain part of the variation, but most is unexplained. The researchers conclude "…that analysts should not equate high-cost plans with Cadillac plans, but that in fact other factors—industry and cost of medical inputs—are as important in predicting whether a plan is a high-cost plan. Without appropriate adjustments, a simple cap may exacerbate rather than ameliorate current inequities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2012, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,010,658 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
Is it just the taxes you care about?

What about refusing dubious preventative medicine? What about the justification for curtailing freedom? Can I force fat people, reckless drivers and smokers to change their behavior?
There is no "refusing dubious preventative medicine." As for freedom, what freedom is being infringed -- the right to get sick and add your costs to that of hospital overhead?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top