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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-26-2014, 10:57 AM
 
15,047 posts, read 8,825,577 times
Reputation: 9509

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Are you saying now that ACA has passed, she is unemployable?
She is 59 years old. Finding another job is going to be difficult at her age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-26-2014, 10:59 AM
 
24,834 posts, read 37,222,327 times
Reputation: 11538
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
What part of "you are not paying the full cost of your insurance" don't you get? That's the argument I hear all the time, that I am a leech who is not "paying my fair share" because I don't pay the full cost of my insurance. What I am attempting to point out is that you who receive employer based insurance aren't paying for the actual cost of your insurance, either, and never have.

Those of us who are self-employed/independent contractors (and there are more and more of us as time goes on and corporations attempt to bolster their bottom lines by cutting costly employee benefits) have no access to such subsidies from our employers, and thus, the cost was completely out of our reach. (See COBRA rates for an idea of what we were facing.) Which is why the ACA was necessary.

If the GOP had put forth some kind of bill that would have given people without employer based insurance a way to buy in I would have been all for that, as well, but they didn't have any interest in that, so the ACA is what we got.

I get it, you don't care about anybody else because you have an employer to subsidize your insurance costs. At lease be honest about that.
The great thing about being self-employed is being able to write off 100% of all health costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:02 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,161 posts, read 23,552,538 times
Reputation: 38452
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
What part of "you are not paying the full cost of your insurance" don't you get? That's the argument I hear all the time, that I am a leech who is not "paying my fair share" because I don't pay the full cost of my insurance. What I am attempting to point out is that you who receive employer based insurance aren't paying for the actual cost of your insurance, either, and never have.

Those of us who are self-employed/independent contractors (and there are more and more of us as time goes on and corporations attempt to bolster their bottom lines by cutting costly employee benefits) have no access to such subsidies from our employers, and thus, the cost was completely out of our reach. (See COBRA rates for an idea of what we were facing.) Which is why the ACA was necessary.

If the GOP had put forth some kind of bill that would have given people without employer based insurance a way to buy in I would have been all for that, as well, but they didn't have any interest in that, so the ACA is what we got.

I get it, you don't care about anybody else because you have an employer to subsidize your insurance costs. At lease be honest about that.
What part of "THEY ARE EARNING IT AS PART OF THEIR PAY/PACKAGE" do you not get?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:03 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,939,497 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
What part of "you are not paying the full cost of your insurance" don't you get? That's the argument I hear all the time, that I am a leech who is not "paying my fair share" because I don't pay the full cost of my insurance. What I am attempting to point out is that you who receive employer based insurance aren't paying for the actual cost of your insurance, either, and never have.
What you are saying is mind-numbingly stupid.

Where do you think the money came from for your employer to buy insurance on your behalf?

It came from YOUR earnings, which were never paid to you. You have ALWAYS worked for every cent in compensation, whether those dollars are paid to you, or to someone else on your behalf with no choice on your part. YOU are denying that you have to earn EVERY LAST CENT, whether your employer chooses for you, or you choose for you.

Quote:
Those of us who are self-employed/independent contractors (and there are more and more of us as time goes on and corporations attempt to bolster their bottom lines by cutting costly employee benefits) have no access to such subsidies from our employers, and thus, the cost was completely out of our reach. (See COBRA rates for an idea of what we were facing.) Which is why the ACA was necessary.
No more out of your reach than it is for any other employer. You DO employ yourself and you DO work for and must EARN everything.

Quote:
If the GOP had put forth some kind of bill that would have given people without employer based insurance a way to buy in I would have been all for that, as well, but they didn't have any interest in that, so the ACA is what we got.
I'm sorry, the government can't GIVE you anything. It can only take. And, the GOP has, over the years, offered many ideas which would have allowed group buying of insurance. But those were resisted by people LIKE YOU. It is not their fault that Democrats committed a crime against humanity with Obamacare. THEY chose it. Blaming the GOP is like beating the dog because the cat clawed your furniture.

Quote:
I get it, you don't care about anybody else because you have an employer to subsidize your insurance costs. At lease be honest about that.
Wrong. Those of us who oppose obamacare do so BECAUSE WE CARE about people and do not wish to do evil to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:03 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,880,475 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntwrkguy1 View Post
Ads paid for by taxpayer dollars featuring PajamaBoy?
Dont forget, we needed to pass ACA in order to stop insurance companies from doing things like, taking insurers money and buying ads with it..

Every single time ACA has to buy an ad, it proves its a failure because popular things dont need to be advertised..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:04 AM
 
6,790 posts, read 8,172,626 times
Reputation: 6998
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
What part of "you are not paying the full cost of your insurance" don't you get? That's the argument I hear all the time, that I am a leech who is not "paying my fair share" because I don't pay the full cost of my insurance. What I am attempting to point out is that you who receive employer based insurance aren't paying for the actual cost of your insurance, either, and never have.

Those of us who are self-employed/independent contractors (and there are more and more of us as time goes on and corporations attempt to bolster their bottom lines by cutting costly employee benefits) have no access to such subsidies from our employers, and thus, the cost was completely out of our reach. (See COBRA rates for an idea of what we were facing.) Which is why the ACA was necessary.

If the GOP had put forth some kind of bill that would have given people without employer based insurance a way to buy in I would have been all for that, as well, but they didn't have any interest in that, so the ACA is what we got.

I get it, you don't care about anybody else because you have an employer to subsidize your insurance costs. At lease be honest about that.
Employer based health insurance benefits those who receive it by being untaxed income. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the health insurance tax exclusion will reduce federal revenue by $248 billion this year, including lost income and payroll taxes. That is equal to 1.5 percent of the gross domestic product.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:04 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,939,497 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Are you saying now that ACA has passed, she is unemployable?
No, it's just that the ACA now limits employment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:04 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,880,475 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
She is 59 years old. Finding another job is going to be difficult at her age.
you didnt answer the question
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
The great thing about being self-employed is being able to write off 100% of all health costs.
As an individual who's an independent contractor, you'd think she would know this already..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:07 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,880,475 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
No, it's just that the ACA now limits employment.
Exactly, which even they admit,
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
Those of us who are self-employed/independent contractors (and there are more and more of us as time goes on and corporations attempt to bolster their bottom lines by cutting costly employee benefits)
they just refuse to connect the dots that its due to things like ACA..

ACA good, ooh, people will lose their jobs because of it? those mean employers... ACA is still good

its a walking talking soundbite with no substance..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2014, 11:09 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,939,497 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by detshen View Post
Employer based health insurance benefits those who receive it by being is untaxed income. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the health insurance tax exclusion will reduce federal revenue by $248 billion this year, including lost income and payroll taxes. That is equal to 1.5 percent of the gross domestic product.
If I build widgets for XYZ company, and they pay me 2400/mo and pay 950/mo insurance, I have to earn all 3350 for the company to have the money to buy it.

If the company paid me 3350, and the government then forces them to buy $950/mo insurance, then the company will pay me 2400/mo and the insurance 950/mo, it's that simple.

I still have to earn it all. I just get no choice in how that $950 is directed, my employer does.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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