Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:32 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,651,677 times
Reputation: 4784

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post

Do you really think private health care insurer's will ever put the welfare of people over profits? No. Remember, they are profiting from health care. They're not providing health care, they are providing insurance. If you eliminated them, all those savings could go into ACTUAL health care, not profits for big health insurance companies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:33 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,419,987 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
Did you know the following? And this is from the U.S. government:

The Affordable Care Act does not require employers to provide health insurance for their employees.

The Employer Responsibility provision of the Affordable Care Act applies to businesses with more than 50 full-time workers.

For small businesses:

If you have up to 25 employees, pay average annual wages below $50,000, and provide health insurance, you may qualify for a small business tax credit of up to 35% (up to 25% for non-profits) to offset the cost of your insurance. This will bring down the cost of providing insurance.

Starting in 2014, the small business tax credit goes up to 50% (up to 35% for non-profits) for qualifying businesses. This makes the cost of providing insurance even lower.

Starting in 2014, small businesses with generally fewer than 100 employees can shop in an Affordable Insurance Exchange—a new, transparent, competitive marketplace where individuals and small businesses can buy affordable, qualified health benefit plans. This gives small businesses power similar to what large businesses have to get better choices and lower prices for employee coverage.

Exchanges will offer more choices of high-quality coverage and lower prices. Exchanges will offer a choice of plans that meet certain benefits and cost standards.

Small businesses will benefit from insurance with lower administrative costs compared to the choices available in the small business market today because they will be able to pool together.

Limits on insurance rating, such as no more rating based on employees’ health status or gender, will lower premiums for many small businesses.

The small business tax credits and the new competition promoted by Affordable Insurance Exchanges will help keep the cost of insurance down.

Under the Affordable Care Act, a small business owner's insurance for the group (or for any member of the group) cannot be canceled because someone in your group becomes sick. This is called “guaranteed renewal.”


Small Business | HealthCare.gov
So in another thread you have a problem with corporate welfare and subsidies and now you're in favor ....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:33 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,108 posts, read 41,277,178 times
Reputation: 45156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
They got a "C" for dealing with infant mortality. The link was provided earlier on this thread.

Infant mortality rate - Canada and world results

- Canada gets a “C†and ranks second-to-last among 17 peer countries. Its infant mortality rate is shockingly high for a country at Canada’s level of socio-economic development.

- Although Canada has dramatically reduced its infant mortality rate over the past few decades, other countries have done better.

- Infant mortality is a sentinel indicator of child health and the well-being of a society over time.
The problem is that not all countries use the same definitions of live birth to calculate infant mortality, which is the number of deaths of infants under one year of age per 1,000 live births in a given population. In the US, a live birth is any gestational age. So a very immature fetus that is born with a heartbeat is a live birth. Many countries do not consider those to be live births, but miscarriages.

Another factor is that infant mortality rates vary greatly from state to state in the US. Comparing the entire US to smaller countries with more homogeneous populations is problematic.

The biggest factor in the difference between the US and countries ranked higher is a higher rate of pre-term birth. The good news that the preterm birth rate has decreased each of the last 5 years.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:34 PM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,264,758 times
Reputation: 3444
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
There is nothing to indicate millions will suffer. In fact, 50 million Americans will be able to get healthcare insurance, who are currently uninsured. I don't think that's going to cause much suffering.
Except that we do have research to indicate millions will suffer. About 3 million more people are expected to lose insurance.

Less people are going to have healthcare under Obamacare.

"CBO and JCT now estimate that fewer people will be covered by the Medicaid program, more people will obtain health insurance through the newly established exchanges, and more people will be uninsured. The magnitude of those changes varies from year to year."

CBO | Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act Updated for the Recent Supreme Court Decision
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:36 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,651,677 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
So in another thread you have a problem with corporate welfare and subsidies and now you're in favor ....
This isn't a corporate subsidy. It is a transfer payment to enable small businesses that otherwise might be unable, to provide health care insurance for their employees. And Obamacare establishes the insurance marketplaces, a fairer market for small business owners to purchase health care insurance, giving them the same breaks that larger corporations achieve in purchasing health care insurance because of their size.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:39 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,651,677 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
Except that we do have research to indicate millions will suffer. About 3 million more people are expected to lose insurance.

Less people are going to have healthcare under Obamacare.

"CBO and JCT now estimate that fewer people will be covered by the Medicaid program, more people will obtain health insurance through the newly established exchanges, and more people will be uninsured. The magnitude of those changes varies from year to year."

CBO | Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act Updated for the Recent Supreme Court Decision

You will have to explain to me how more people will become uninsured, since everyone will be required to have insurance. And a marketplace exchange of competitive insurance plans is being established, and if someone cannot afford their health insurance premiums, the government will assist them. Obamacare is designed to stop people from falling through the cracks as they are now, so you're going to have to explain how you think it will result in more people becoming uninsured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:42 PM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,264,758 times
Reputation: 3444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
A bunch of links about health care monopolies proves nothing. Many people went without health care in the past; many still do. And the old "charity" system did not take care of the problem.
I don't care how old you are. There is no way you are old enough to have ever seen a competitive healthcare market in the US.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
Do you really think private health care insurer's will ever put the welfare of people over profits? No. Remember, they are profiting from health care. They're not providing health care, they are providing insurance. If you eliminated them, all those savings could go into ACTUAL health care, not profits for big health insurance companies.
Insurance is not the only monopoly, not by a long shot. Think back to your advanced econ class. When you have monopolies competition is stifled and you end up paying more for less service.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:52 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,651,677 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
I don't care how old you are. There is no way you are old enough to have ever seen a competitive healthcare market in the US.



Insurance is not the only monopoly, not by a long shot. Think back to your advanced econ class. When you have monopolies competition is stifled and you end up paying more for less service.
I know you weren't addressing me, but I'm not in favor of health care monopolies. And how does Obamacare increase the extent of health care monopolies? If Obamacare wasn't going to reduce costs and put a dent in the healthcare insurance companies profits, why did they fight it tooth and nail?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Inland Levy County, FL
8,806 posts, read 6,112,361 times
Reputation: 2949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
That has never, ever worked in the past. If that worked, we wouldn't need "Obamacare", single payor health care systems, public options, or anything else. I know you are very young, but read some history.
That has nothing to do with it. What we have in America is not a true free market system. The gov't has far too much say in how businesses operate and what people must do for anything to really be free. More free than most other countries, yes, but not a real free market system, which is what I'm advocating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2013, 11:00 PM
 
Location: Inland Levy County, FL
8,806 posts, read 6,112,361 times
Reputation: 2949
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Do you have a source for this statement?
I'd recommend watching the Business of Being Born or Pregnant in America.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top