New CBO report shows ominious signs for ACA

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by ugahairydawgs, Sep 20, 2012.

  1. ugahairydawgs macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #1
  2. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #2
    Please take more.

    A bill was jsut passed allowing people to send a check to make a donation to the government. excited to see how many contribute more
     
  3. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #3
    Considering taxes are the lowest they've been since the 50's, you could say we're just bumping ourselves back up to a better median.

    Or...

    DOOM AND GLOOM!
     
  4. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #4
    We all know the ACA is nowhere near perfect but it's a start to reforming our ****ed up healthcare system.

    As for the 6 million, tough ****. We're all in this together and they need to get insurance. The ACA likely offers them subsidies if they are lower middle income.
     
  5. likemyorbs macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #5
    Our country is in debt, lower our damn taxes! :rolleyes:
     
  6. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #6
    The penalty is about what? 2 months of health insurance coverage in the US? Sounds like a good deal, except you get nothing in return. :rolleyes:

    ----------

    Im sure if we ask nicely the health care corporations that Obama handed the country over to will give them a discount rate.

    Just a sign of things to come folks. Once you are all in the net the price gouging and collusion can start. Maybe get some lobbyists up on capital hill to exempt them from actually covering sick people.
     
  7. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #7
    Washington needs to start spending like it's coming out of their wallets.
     
  8. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #8
    Maybe they should pony up and buy health care then. Not our faults they are being penalized because they haven't purchased health care. Right now, if any one of these people needs treatment or hospitalization, who's going to be footing the bill? Oh yeah, us taxpayers!

    Tough ****.
     
  9. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #9
    I thought we weren't supposed to care about freeloaders.
     
  10. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #10

    Boom! :D
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    Someone who makes $44,680+ could spend nearly 20-25% of their income on health care insurance costs. Mostly because these companies are designed to make money for their shareholders. Your costs will be inflated further, not to cover these people who can't afford insurance, but rather to buy some guy who decided to give Obama's campaign some cash a new private jet. The old one's interior was a bit dated.

    Corporate interests (money) and your health do not intersect at any juncture. Forcing everyone into corporate pockets is actually a step backwards.
     
  12. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #12

    http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx
     
  13. dscuber9000 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Location:
    Indiana, US
    #13
    Still waiting for public option to fix all this ********.
     
  14. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #14
    I don't see a government subsidy for 45k+ incomes. I also don't know where they are getting their annual health insurance premium rates from, because it doesn't seem as high as some of the premiums I have seen without employer contributions.

    Edit: I see they are assuming off of CBO estimates (they only estimate off of what is handed to them, which in this instance is the best case scenario). They are also allotting for a drop in premium rates, not going to happen.

    Your party fed the entirety of the country to corporations that gave campaign contributions. I fail to see how democrats are any better than Republicans in this aspect.
     
  15. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    Still waiting for single-payer to fix this.

    You know ... like the Canadian system that ZA loves so much.
     
  16. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #16
    I'm afraid a combination of American exceptionalism, and politicians/media on the payroll can't allow that to happen. You might get single payer in 2028 if enough people kill off that it starts to affect consumer demand. Rich bailout babies got bills to pay too ya know.
     
  17. citizenzen, Sep 20, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2012

    citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #17
    What does that even mean?

    Do you mean the perception held by some people that America is exceptional, and that delusional perception might hold them back from seeking better solutions?
     
  18. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #18
    Its the delusion that everything created in America can't be improved by ideas outside of the country. In fact, just because the ideas were formed elsewhere, they won't be used. Its a type of elitist ignorance, and I would know first hand as I felt this way in the past regarding health care.

    Any health care system where corporate interests are served first is one doomed to fail in my opinion.
     
  19. ugahairydawgs thread starter macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #19
    I don't see how one run by a government bureaucracy is any better. At least with the market based model there are competitive forces that can effect rates for both insurance and care. Taking that away and handing that kind of power over to the federal government, an entity notorious for excess and waste, is nowhere near ideal.
     
  20. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #20
    How is the efficiency working out for you? Have you looked at rates if you aren't covered by an employer? The market is good at maximizing profits for services, profits are not the goal in a health system.

    All that the new ACA bill is going to do is pressure companies to find ways to externalize costs. I imagine they will lobby to get government to pay for the people who cost them the most so that they can reap profits again. Corporations are happy for tax payers to pay for the costly patients while they sit back and float in cash, they've been doing it for years by actively denying coverage.
     
  21. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #21
    If that were really the case then Medicare and the VA would be way more expensive than private insurance, but the exact opposite is true. The extra costs in private insurance goes to hiring platoons of goons to tell people they won't be covered for a procedure (something that fortunately will end with the ACA) and paying off greedy CEOs and shareholders with unrealistic expectations.

    So tell me again in plain English why government based health care is a bad idea?
     
  22. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #22
    What is the overhead cost of Medicare? Something less than 5% of revenue? How does that compare to private insurance? (One of the ACA provisions limits health insurance companies to 15%, which I think would at least halve their typical profits.) Government itself rather resembles the way an insurance company operates, taking a bit of money from everyone and concentrating it in specific areas. So why would it not be suitable for this?
     

Share This Page