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.
My belief is it will take the new administration at the very least 2 years to make changes to the ACA. Just be careful in that if your husband acquires new employment and new health insurance, that this in fact may effect your current coverage more in the immediate future than a change to the ACA would be way down the road. If I'm not mistaken, a family can not use COBRA and another health insurance plan at the same time. If this happens, look very close at your new policy.
Humans have invented this concept called Civilization, where we live in proximity, work toward common cause and we often pool our resources for the betterment of all.
But we don't "pool our resources." A surprisingly large percentage (about 27%) of the income tax filing population isn't expected to contribute at all in regards to federal income and payroll taxes.
Data for 2015:
Federal Income Tax Units: 171.3 million (Excludes those who are dependents of other tax units)
Federal Income Tax Payers: 93.8 million (Tax filers with a total federal individual income tax obligation of over $5 for the year, already withheld or not)
A tax unit is an individual tax return filer, or a married couple who file a tax return jointly, along with the inclusion of all (if any) dependents of that individual or married couple.
Tax Units with Zero or Negative Individual Income Tax:
77.5 million. 45.3% of all tax units.
Tax Units with Zero or Negative Sum of Income and Payroll Taxes:
Does it surprise anyone that about 27% of all tax units pay NO Federal Income Tax AND NO Payroll Taxes whatsoever on their earnings? That's almost always due to the various refundable tax credits offsetting them both, and almost always benefiting low to middle income earners.
With Medicare, CMS has continually adjusted reimbursements in favor of docs. Borderline most of the way, but so far it continues to work for most docs after 50 years. We only have one doc in town that doesn't take Medicare.
Sure, but that's not because Medicare is so great. It's demographics mixed with government mandate. There are a lot of old people, they're all on Medicare, and the government says you take them all or you can't take any. As far as reimbursements, they're actually continually adjusted because if they followed the government recommendations they'd be like zero.
You make a choice to live and work in the United States, thus agree to the terms and conditions of our government. That government has created and implements various systems to look after it's (and our) interests.
Some of those systems, like public assistance social welfare benefits programs funded by the federal government, are unConstitutional. That responsibility falls to each state (10th Amendment), if their citizens and elected officials so choose to provide such.
That is very correct and part of the issue why many docs do not want a more universal system. Docs also need to be satisfied in this equation. And if they are not adequately compensated they will bring on a shtstorm.
Doctors are paid some of the highest earnings here.
Yet they HC system overall is terrible value for money.
I'm not saying the doctor get paid too much, but the current doctor per 1000 population numbers isn't great.
That discrepancy needs to be explained.
If wages are high, and there are fewer doctors per population, then it suggests there is room for more doctors, that should drive down wages.
But we don't "pool our resources." A surprisingly large percentage (about 27%) of the income tax filing population isn't expected to contribute at all in regards to federal income and payroll taxes.
Does it surprise anyone that about 27% of all tax units pay NO Federal Income Tax AND NO Payroll Taxes whatsoever on their earnings? That's almost always due to the various refundable tax credits offsetting them both, and almost always benefiting low to middle income earners.
No it doesn't surprise me.
Should it?
They still pay taxes, everytime they buy something.
I'm not arguing for a flat tax system if that's what your getting at.
If there aren't enough doctors where you live, that actually means they should be paid more.
But why would there not be enough doctors to begin with?
How could there be a shortage of doctors compared to other 1st world industrialized nations when the privatized for-profit system is supposedly so great?
Shouldn't the market forces be attracting doctors here from every corner of the globe?
Is this more cartelism?
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.
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.
