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 12-04-2018, 09:44 AM
 
18,984 posts, read 9,066,710 times
Reputation: 14688

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AguaDulce View Post
Your argument is far too reasoned to elicit a response from the cruel ones.
Notice that no one here will touch it, though, because they have no defense for trying to take away from other Americans what they have enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, for decades now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2018, 09:44 AM
 
1,156 posts, read 939,941 times
Reputation: 3599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gator Fan 79 View Post
Not a tax expert but I would say yes. If you work for megacorp and receive $24,000 in healthcare benefits, you don't have to pay income or payroll tax on that amount. That's a subsidy. This article explains it pretty well:

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brie...insurance-work

Granted subsidies are a divisive issue but if employees get government subsidized health insurance why should those on ACA be treated differently?

Full disclosure - we are usually slightly above the ACA income/subsidy threshold. That means that we pay the full cost if we can't mitigate income with IRA's or HSA's. Fair or not, those just above the income limit pay far more as a percent of income for health care premiums than most other people. I think this should be tweaked.

I understand how it works and why, I just question calling it a subsidy. This subsidy argument has become fairly common across a host of issues but the extreme conclusion is that 100% of our income is potential government revenue and therefore every $1 we keep is a subsidy. More realistically, there is an overall tax target and and the government tries to encourage certain behaviors by tax breaks. For all I know, the government saves money by providing incentives for employers to offer affordable healthcare. But I think its disingenuous to view every tax break as lost revenue because without them, most likely overall rates would have to be lower.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 09:46 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 776,819 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
No if someone pays into social security that money is theirs when they retire. Like the retirement savings they may have.
What?!?!?! What does this have to do with you not wanting to help Americans who cannot afford health insurance?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 09:49 AM
 
7,293 posts, read 4,091,269 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Politicians lie and make promises they cant possibly fulfill. No its not okay, but you keep looking to them for the answer, worse yet you've empowered them to find one.
Trump isn't a doctor, congress isn't full of medical experts, so why on earth are people looking to them for their health care?
The damage wrought by govt schools and mass media.
Bottom line is that politicians screwed up the health care system in our country. They need to unscrew it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 09:50 AM
 
30,135 posts, read 11,759,905 times
Reputation: 18645
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
Until you work full time plus overtime against doctor's orders to be able to afford to eat, have a roof over your head, and still get your chemotherapy then no, I don't think you have worked nearly as hard as I have. Until you've gone to class to complete your master's degree after a 10 hour work day where you are on a respirator because your lungs are recovering from damage from chemo then no, sweetheart, you don't know the meaning of hard work. Nor as hard as others balancing severe chronic or acute health issues with paying the bills.

My partner is self-employed and, additionally, employs his 60+ year old parents and several others in his rural, low-income community. He pays the full, unsubsidized cost. It's cheaper than private insurance through a broker - private insurance that wouldn't have been open to him at all without the ACA thanks to pre-existing conditions.

We both were 22 the first time we were denied health insurance due to minor pre-existing conditions pre-ACA. We're now 30s and since then have had diagnoses that are resolved, but would forever prevent us from having health insurance. Sorry being alive is such an inconvenience, and I'm sorry that your success has rendered you incapable of understanding how health insurance works (i.e. even though I was insured when my cancer diagnosis came, I was 23 and had only paid in less than a week's care. I will be retirement age before I've paid in as much as my treatment and follow-up care costs - I certainly wish I didn't get my money's worth!).

I applaud you for surviving all you have had to endure. Wow. I never said I worked harder than everyone posting here. I have had to overcome all sorts of family tragedies also but I am not going to play the sympathy card. But I do work hard and bet I have worked harder over the years than the person I was referring to.

I think that the insurance system denying people coverage for preexisting illnesses is wrong. And we should never go back there. That part of Obamacare was good. I am fine with some structure with that with mostly private insurance. I know it can be done but between politicians and lobbyists it probably won't happen. And that's what derailed Obamacare with things being tilted to favor the insurance industry. It was doomed for a death spiral. We need tort reform and caps on litigation as well as caps on medical care costs such as prescriptions, doctor pay and a number of other things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 09:54 AM
 
30,135 posts, read 11,759,905 times
Reputation: 18645
Quote:
Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter View Post
What?!?!?! What does this have to do with you not wanting to help Americans who cannot afford health insurance?


I am all for helping them but you first need to get rid of the federal tax system and let people donate directly help those in need. Volunteerism. I don't like robbing Peter to pay Paul. All you get is a bloated federal government. Just look at all the money in all the communities surrounding DC. That is not helping people in need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 10:00 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 776,819 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
I am all for helping them but you first need to get rid of the federal tax system and let people donate directly help those in need. Volunteerism. I don't like robbing Peter to pay Paul. All you get is a bloated federal government. Just look at all the money in all the communities surrounding DC. That is not helping people in need.
In other words, you're not for helping. Got it. Why would anyone risk fighting for America (if America was under attack) when that country would just let them die on the streets? Seems like your country gives you nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 10:12 AM
 
7,293 posts, read 4,091,269 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
I think that the insurance system denying people coverage for preexisting illnesses is wrong. And we should never go back there. That part of Obamacare was good. I am fine with some structure with that with mostly private insurance. I know it can be done but between politicians and lobbyists it probably won't happen. And that's what derailed Obamacare with things being tilted to favor the insurance industry. It was doomed for a death spiral. We need tort reform and caps on litigation as well as caps on medical care costs such as prescriptions, doctor pay and a number of other things.
You and I agree that politicians and lobbyists have screwed things up. People on both sides aren't happy. We need to either fix the ACA or get something else.

It's not exactly on a death spiral, though. Even Fox News polls suggest otherwise.


The number of voters who want Obamacare completely repealed is at a new low
January 19, 2017
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox...bamacare-shift


Most voters are unhappy with the direction the country is taking. Majorities disagree with President Trump on the border wall, and extra tax-cut cash is nowhere to be seen. And, by a wide margin, Democrats are considered the party that would better handle health care -- at a time when most prioritize health care in deciding their vote for Congress.
September 23, 2018
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox...term-elections
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 10:14 AM
 
19,603 posts, read 12,203,791 times
Reputation: 26394
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
Yes, which the right has been trying to take away since they were enacted, claiming we are moochers for receiving them. Meanwhile, anyone who gets their health insurance through their employer has been receiving huge government subsidies to help them afford their insurance for decades. (See post #356)

That's my point. No one is demanding they give up their subsidies, but they are demanding the the self-employed and the entrepreneurs give up theirs. THEY are not moochers for receiving big health insurance subsidies, but WE are moochers for wanting the same deal.
I see, yes, this is very true. Those who get employer insurance still benefit from subsidies. And dare to complain about ACA policies and subsidies!

Low income self employed are also getting left out of expanded Medicaid -something many states are doing now. The catch is the work requirements. Some states that are implementing them do not count self employment, but they do count volunteer work and regular employment.

The entire US health insurance system is a patchy mess of nebulous rules and changes and you never know what you're going to get in any given year. You can be paying through the nose with the best insurance and then they don't wanna pay because Dr. Zololokdasfhie in the ER isn't part of your network but there was no way for you to know that during your massive heart attack.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,702,516 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
I applaud you for surviving all you have had to endure. Wow. I never said I worked harder than everyone posting here. I have had to overcome all sorts of family tragedies also but I am not going to play the sympathy card. But I do work hard and bet I have worked harder over the years than the person I was referring to.

I think that the insurance system denying people coverage for preexisting illnesses is wrong. And we should never go back there. That part of Obamacare was good. I am fine with some structure with that with mostly private insurance. I know it can be done but between politicians and lobbyists it probably won't happen. And that's what derailed Obamacare with things being tilted to favor the insurance industry. It was doomed for a death spiral. We need tort reform and caps on litigation as well as caps on medical care costs such as prescriptions, doctor pay and a number of other things.
States have historically been responsible for licensing and regulating all insurers, not just healthcare insurers. No two states have the same regulations. Pre ACA, most states allowed healthcare insurers to deny or limit coverage to those with preexisting conditions. Some states gave free reign to insurers to define those conditions and an unlimited “ look back” period.

The ACA created a common baseline. States continue to license and regulate insurers. There continue to be variances between states. This includes but is not limited to which medications must be covered.
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 07:17 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