Chew on it RWWJ's.

The new trend in business was to pass the cost onto "we the people". Like we pay for your coverage. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Let the fallout begin....Very little our govern can not force us to do now. Pretty sad day for our econ and country. Pretty happy day for the LWWJ's.

At least the court stopped short of allowing it to fall under the commerce clause again. Not that it really matters.

Look around. Most large corps are passing on more and more of the cost of healthcare onto the employee yet the CEO, etc is taking home more than ever before. Healthcare has become the new "cross the board pay cut" for all but the fat cats and unions who already have a contract. Of course all business loves the idea of providing zero healthcare and having the tax payer pick up the tab. I bet they'd love it if we picked up their federal income tax liability too....oh wait we already do that.

Trickle down economics again? Where did you get the idea that if we give Corps more money they will use it to our benefit? Right now they are sitting on more cash reserves than at any other time in history but where are the jobs? Instead they continue to cut and cut.

So what's different pre healthcare mandate versus post healthcare mandate? Nothing. Corp America will continue to do what they were already doing. Destroying the middle class.

You are aiming solely at the large corporations. Small businesses, whose CEO's (owners of closley held corps and LLC's,) don't use private jets to vacation, they employ half of the private sector employees in the US. They provide 44% of the of the total US payroll and represent over 99% of all employer firms in the us. Yes, it is easy to rail against the big guys. You seem to entirely miss the little guys.

As someone who actually is an economist by training and education, and as someone who actually tears apart the financials of 175 small businesses on an annual basis, I can tell you, this is going to hurt.

I also purchased, for my bank, a number of fractional loan participations of $2 million each, in 10 large privately and publicly owned businesses, with revenues in the billions. All of their annual statements had discussions on what the effect will be on their bottom line from this health care reform. It is going to hurt.

Do I think pre existing conditions should be covered? Yes.
Do I think that this health care plan is as good as it could be? No. I think they went overboard on this legislation, and the majority of the population of the US also believes the same.

Really happy for you, if you consider this a win. It is going to slow down any recovery considerably.

Actually Insurance Co's will now be required to spend 80% of premiums on claims leaving 20% for admin costs and anything over will be refunded to the payers. You will see a huge decline in bankruptcies due to medical costs which was another added burden on the tax payer. There will be no more denials due to pre-existing conditions. In other words if you weren't on the tax payer dole any longer all of your meds, etc would be considered pre-existing and you'd pay much more. It's already been shown that the tax payer ends up covering no matter what. Yet those whom are treated without insurance the tax payer is billed at that rate you see on your bill prior to the "contracted rate". Seems to me less people will be made to suffer.

Case in point....I am insured through one of the largest corps in the world and we used to have some of the best insurance as well. Now we have one of the worst as not only the majority of costs has been passed on to the employee but even the handling of claims which is a nightmare at times. My wife works for a local small firm and has the same insurance company. Most of her costs are paid via the company and she pays a co pay and that's it. We both saw the same Doc at the same clinic. My share of the cost almost $200. Her's $13.

Will having to pay for health care hurt small businesses? Sure unless they pass the cost on to the employee. But why do you expect the tax payer to pick up that tab?

A piss poor bill that we will now live with for the rest of our lives. Only chance to get rid of it now gone. Not surprising that the Stlhds of the world will cheer as they can only get as far as it being a win for their party.

Good thing for Reps and Dems that the country is so filled with sheep.

You guys are confusing Constitutionality with policy...not a big surprise considering what all the money spent by the anti's have been saying on TV for the past year.

It's not the Court's job to like it or not...it's their job to decide if it is supported in the law, or not...which there really wasn't ever any question about. It was a total waste of time and money to spend so much arguing about it over the past few years.

I also think that the money will dry up that has been flowing like water to tell the masses that it's such an unconstitutional and illegal mess...and the people might be getting a more balanced picture of it now.

This should give the Romney campaign a bit of a boost, though, since Romney will actually be able to take an actual position on something now, something he hasn't done over the past year. Of course he'll get burned by having pushed thru his own version of almost the same law in Massachusetts.

Fish on...

Todd

I think the results are often counter-intuitive, so I'll suggest:

* This HURTS Obama, because it's easier to be against things than for them. This gives Romney and RWWJ's something to rally around, and less for Team Obama. Never mind the Romneycare stuff, I think this issue is a net plus for the GOP

* The Affordable Care Act will likely make the average American life slightly BETTER, but will also make people LESS HAPPY. It's like people being super gloomy about how violent society and the world of today is, when in comparison to all of recorded history it's about the most peaceful/prosperous time to be alive.

Everyone needs medical care and, whether you have insurance or not, the law say's you must be treated. So somebody pays. Some seem to feel that taxpayers picking up the tab is just another perk for businesses that can't or won't provide for their employees.

I work for a multi-billion dollar corporation, and I'm willing to bet that the overall impact of this decision on our daily operations will amount to a hill of beans.

It will be like the Family Leave Act - something that was promised to bring businesses to their knees - but didn't.

JMHO

I already pay for low income people who can't afford insurance and so does anyone who pays taxes. At least now it will be at a contracted rate.

Since the Republicans are agin' it, and Obama is for it, and the SCOTUS upheld it, this is a big win for the Republicans to rally around for the rest of the campaign season. Had the Republicans really cared about this issue, and they did agree that the status quo is broken, they would have tried to improve this legislation, instead of sandbagging and doing everything politically possible to make it the 2700 page POS that it is, and the SCOTUS upheld. Since partisanship is a far higher priority than the welfare of the nation, any improvements to the ACA will come slowly and painfully. But at least we're told this legislation will further delay improvement in the national economy - another big win for the Republicans, since the worse things are under Obama, the better the Republicans like it.

Romney is on the tube now "Obamacare this...Obamacare that...blah, blah blah". "I was for it before I was against it".

This decision was an affirmation of the premise in the Declaration of Independence that all of us have inalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The purpose of Government is to guarantee and protect said rights. Everyone knows that without your health, you don't have squat...and if you do, it'll be loose and poorly formed.

The medicaid part of the decision is problematic. As one who favored single payer, well the BO care will not work as to how you pay for it as it falls way short of covering the real cost BUT the current system stinks as well. Bottom line now they will have to fix it AND IT WILL INVOLVE TAXES and lots of them. You don't pay the Doc with a chicken or pig anymore and many can not afford health care now. Time to move into this century but AM is right it needs to not be built into employers cost as businesses can not compete in foreign trade especially in manufacturing jobs as it is. ( which is what is killing the middle class ) We as a people need to step up and pay in a TAX whatever it cost to insure all citizens.

If nothing else today the court said you can not call a pig a cow as call what you like it is a pig ( tax ). Now prepare BO fans as you watch one sound bite add after another as he said time and time again it was not a tax on camera. Going to cost the D's the senate as it was breaking 50R to 48D with two independents before and this is going to light things up. The prez has bumping up and down but will take the electoral vote and has a strong possibility of losing the popular vote. He is around .01% a head this week but trailed .01% last this one should be a real interesting thing to watch track out.

Today's decision was not the end of the discussion but the beginning of all citizens being forced to come to grips with the cost of modern health care and it is going to be interesting to see what happens when the true cost of health care is seen and felt by all. It will not be a spectator sport.

2012 election will be just like 2010.....slaughter fest.

Nice prediction.

Phvckin' activist judges.

Actually in all seriousness I, like virtually everyone regardless of political leanings feel that our healthcare system is a gargantuan mess. Having the SCOTUS rule the way they did leaves me more hopeful and less bitter. I know that being a bit more right leaning it won't garner me any favor amongst other right-minded folks but I have a great respect for the SCOTUS and will hope this ruling works out for the benefit of all of us.

I actually agree with RvsW on this one. Things ARE a mess, regardless of Obamacare. I hope that it makes people less bitter (although I'm not sure it will).

I DO think it will act as a stable base to build upon, hopefully leading to the public option. Without the public options, all this is for nothing anyway.

On another note, Sol Duc's prediction success rate continues to lag behind Madam Cleo's.

I too agree with RvW. It was heartening to see the court rule based on their interpenetration of the constitution vs. pure party politics. The system is working. I especially commend Chief Justice Roberts.

I think Obamacare is far from perfect, as is the current system. IMHO we needed a single payer system. Now we need politicians to act in good faith to fix the problems rather than just trying to score political points. Don't hold your breath on that one.

At the risk of being redundant look to the Medicaid part of the decision. It does create a bit of turmoil in that HHS can not whack a state if they do not follow the fed policy. It will get fixed as neither side can afford the mayhem of lack of continuity it creates not to mention the effect on those in the program state by state.

It also sets precedent, as one pundit said, in that it clips the wings of congress as to the ability of them to pass laws on how the federal agencies conduct business as it relates to individual states. The example used was the highway fund where the feds say you do this or loose funding. Remember the 55 speed limit and the ruckus in the Midwest during the famous gas shortage when they refused to lower the speed limit? This one is a jewel as it walks out of the health care bit and across other issues due to the fact it has the potential to restrict federal interference in a states business. It is a interesting aspect.

A paste:

The justices rejected two of the administration's three arguments in support of the insurance requirement. But the court said the mandate can be construed as a tax. "Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness," Roberts said.

The court found problems with the law's expansion of Medicaid, but even there said the expansion could proceed as long as the federal government does not threaten to withhold states' entire Medicaid allotment if they don't take part in the law's extension.

Link to AP Mark Sherman http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/arti...f3c0617524d1252

Perhaps someone can help me out here. I really haven't spent much time looking at this, but wonder how in the end it will effect me. Right now My income is down, but typically I make around $60,000 -$65,000gross with a net of about $45,000 to $50,000. Typically I might qualify for some reductions, but for the most part my income is right at or above the crux. The only insurance available for my family ran about $1800 a month. I suspect it is now closer to $2,000. If I were to pay this, my left over income will be around $25,000 to $30000, which will make me close or below the federal proverty level. I know the best answer is to make more, but right now thats hard to do. Even if I kick my net to $65,000, I still will qualify for reduced lunches and would barely above the proverty level.

My guess is that I will end up paying a $500 penalty.

I fail to see how people expect someone like McDonalds, with a hourly rate of $9.00 to pay $1000 a month extra and think it could effect our economy.

Healthcare (and more importantly healthcare insurance) needs reform. This was the first step in reform. It was ugly, involved compromise, faced powerful entrenched interests, and resulted in incremental change.

Seems like things are working. I guess I'll take a little reform over no reform.

An Ad Hoc result may be that the Administration collects its Trophy egg, but the goose is killed.
There'll be some navel-gazing on this one.

Surprising that Chief Justice Roberts upheld on the grounds of an allowable tax.
That is scary!

Originally, I would have liked to have seen a 20 or maybe 100 page sensible bill written that most everyone could understand to address a huge problem rather than the 24-2700 page monstrosity that will cost small business. Corps have a legal staff or can afford to hire council to be certain they are compliant, but small business below the 50 person threshold do not.

Ultimately the insurance companies are the big winners from this decision. Health care will not get cheaper because "everyone" is not going to buy insurance anyway [nothing new], nor is the pool going to grow. Many people and small businesses will opt to pay the fine which is much cheaper, nor will private individuals pay annually.

We are still faced by the same problem.
Call it a first step, or, are we really back to square one.
I hope it all works out.

Just kinda throwin' shitt at the wall here.

Exactly. But now that people have to accept this as something that exists, I'm hoping we can start working towards improvement. That improvement is the public option.

And no, it won't fix everything and it won't make everyone happy. But it WILL be an improvement.

Thats how it works LWWJ. Its called chit rollin down hill. It includes all expenses on employers that must be passed along, to employees and customers. Invite some street folks in for dinner for a month and then look at your food budget and then figure out how much less fishing you will do to feed your extended family. Its no different when new regulations and taxes come down from the Messiah. Gas prices go up before its delivered and so does food. Not many suppliers are dumb enough to raise prices on a customer on the day of the delivery, with zero notice. Even the govt gives you plenty of notice so you can raise prices or cut expenses somewhere else.

Go ahead and celebrate. Its a victory in a battle, not a war.

The middle class is the one doing the shopping. Remember, you hate walmart, even though thats where the little folks shop to make ends meet.

The biggest difference is that the youngest adults dont want to pay for it. Those with degrees and a good salary will get a benefits package, but not as good as a govt employee. (at least for now) The money from healthcare premiums will come right out of the wages they would have been paid in lieu of that expense. Since more people will be paying more for people who cannot pay, its the working folks who absorb that increase in costs.

The total burden cost of an employee cannot go up without raising prices or reducing expenses somewhere else. Like it or not, the CEO is not going to work for free. Since business is not growing, new employees are not needed bad enough to endure increased expenses. The value of everything is based on the lowest employee cost, which is minimum wage. Thats what the unions use to figure their contracts and cost of living adjustments. Management looks down at those wages and has to pay more for managers, (although first level supervisors are often close to union scale) I knew car a salesmen that made more than the desk managers and F & I "managers", so he would not take a promotion. For the most part, a promotion comes with an increase in salary. Even at Ben and Jerrys. "Newmans own" is a nonprofit. Id bet money the CEO/Director, makes more than anyone else.

When you can do what the average CEO does and do it as well, then you too, can demand more money than anyone else. They get fired when they dont get it done.

No sh!t, huh?

You are SO tuned in to American industry, it's as if you've been in the corporate board room and on the plant floor at the same time.

McDonalds and 1300 other large companies and unions are exempt from the new health care plan. So there is just a little more that "we the people" get to pay for.

ya sure....

Name one dept run by the government that has competition, where the govt does a better job.

Schools
Post office
Fannie mae, Freddie mac
military hospitals

Competition weeds out waste fraud and greed.
Legal reform weeds out stupid and expensive lawsuits, loser pays. Just look at Texas for results.
Freedom to keep your health insurance carrier is no difference than moving across the country and insuring with the same auto insurance company, bank or cell phone carrier. There is universal acceptance in many union locals across a wide area. But health care is somewhat of a monopoly.

Pre-existing conditions and other features of health insurance plans, do not require 2700 pages, or several thousand new IRS employees to make sure you are audited, to make sure you are enrolled and paying.

That's what really pisses me off about this fiasco. Large Corps and Unions are big (democrap) donors so they get an exemption from that which will save all us peasants. Small business owners tend to vote Republican and will shoulder the burden.....AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I heard the waivers are only good until about 2014. ie, give us time to elect someone else.

All in all, no outrage at all that Obama said noone under 250 grand will get a tax increase.


Scotus, just ruled its a tax increase. Not a fair tax increase and not a equal under the law tax increase and may not be constitutional according to some attorneys, but there it is.
Obama lied about his tax increase.

I believe you hoid wong.

Interesting...I haven't had a chance to read all 2700 pages yet. I think I'm still on the first paragraph....slow reader, ADHD and narcolepsy ya know.

Do you ever, wonder why Lead Eater drops apostrophes into sentences where, they make no sense?

It's like English is, a second language for him.

Have you, noticed this too?

No doubt. I'm hoping against hope to have high tea tomorrow with the Honorable Patty Murray, I'm sure a "mom in soccer shoes" will 'splain the finer points...Cucumber finger sammies and scones are the chit.

If that doesn't work I'll have Redhook take me to school whilst reviewing his Impressionist plates.

I raise my pinky to y'all...

Wow.



That was f'ed up.



I feel like I just tossed a rod in the river.

<------------------- ESL

This, thread' has the making of total epicness.

What is laughable:

1. Willard is going to repeal it on his first day in office. Anyone really believe that is going to happen? The law has too many provisions that are popular - good luck on that one Willard. Also consider that Willard is going to dramatically raise defense spending, while cutting the deficet and lowing taxes. Maybe he is a fcking magician.

2. Businesses are not going to hire. Come on, private employment has been on the decline since the Dot. Com bust. Businesses hire when there is demand. Part time jobs to avoid paying benefits has been going on long before this health care plan was concieved.

3. Jobs are going to be shipped over seas. Really, how long has that been going on? Long before this health care plan was conceived. That particular piece of sky fell a long time ago.

What isn't laughable:

1. That the greatest nation in the world can't develop a plan that ensures all of it's citizens have access to health care; that it doesn't see it as a moral imperative, but rather a partisan political issue.

What we have here is a fine collection of contributions to a thread by.........




YoMama would be so proud.

Funny Truth right there!

I lived under a single payer system in New Zealand for 5 years. Affordable Health Care really means - "You are going to die dude, we are going to make you comfortable but we are not going to do anything heroic to extend your life."

I'm fine with that - having watched my Mom and Dad spend 95% of their lifetime Healthcare spend in the last 6 months of their lives, I undertstand that the current system is not sustainable. We need to accept the truth that this life has one outcome for us all and we need to manage healthcare to keep that in mind.

One thing learned on the Fire Dept is that the best way to fight
fire is to prevent it.
Same applies to human health issues. Except for accidental injury
or genetic defects the rest of the human health issue are a matter
of indulgences. Too much food, too much tv, too much smoke and
booze.
Education is the answer for most folks. The ones that cannot be
educated can be cadavers for the medical profession to play with.

Hope to hell I go sitting under a tree in the boonies watching a
game trail. The coyotes can scatter my bones.

Ed, Ed, Ed.....so we should kill all the old sick people and use the savings to provide free care for the younger folks? Remember you are getting old now...

Someone needs do a reality check. As I said before...Corps are sitting on more cash than ever before. CEO's are making more money than ever before. The disparity between the rich and the poor, the rich and the middle class, is wider than it's ever been. Yet "they" want more. "they" want you picking up even more of the tab because the disparity needs to be even greater. It's about time we the people start (demanding) mandating against this greed. BTW...the average CEO is merely a grossly over paid figure head. Total failure means employees lose their jobs not the CEO. And if or when the CEO does get hit getting fired makes them even richer unlike you and I.

Soylent Green.....try the Organic version.

BTW....if business is going to be hit so bad by Obamacare how come Wall Street is having a huge day?

That's 'old-hat' for you isn't it Danny?

I think it is a big waste of time and money for the House to try and over turn this legislation. I hope they pull their heads out.

"BTW....if business is going to be hit so bad by Obamacare how come Wall Street is having a huge day?"

News from Eurozone...

Apparently there is too much common sense in the 'choose your
demise' approach. And besides all those recipients of your
life savings would have to put some of their employees on the
street if they had to take their hands out of the familial pocket.

Hold on a minute. I thought Obamacare was going to do severe damage to profits and devastate the economy? Wall Street must be stupid.

Now is not the time Hank. Wait a few months.

Yeah................that's what he said.

Marsha...health care is going to make those mythical "job creators" fire people, and that's a problem?

But...you don't think we should hand over our life savings those same "job creators" to extend our lives another six months?

Do they only "create jobs" with the money they spend on health care, not the money they make off it?

(It's a trick question...they don't create any jobs, not from either)

Fish on...

Todd

Chief Justice John Roberts is all over the lame-stream media.
"The Man of the Hour".

WTF?
The libs have a new tingle up their leg.

I thought it was fuckin RebumblicKKKins RWWJ knuckle-draggin' neanderthals.
But nope... it's a fact. The libs love us now.

The same people that like big government seem to think that becase corporations are sitting on large reserves that the corps should hire people. The only reason for a company to hire is if they can't meet the demand for their goods or services not beacause they have a large reserve.

Which is why you need customers with money in their pockets, also known as a "strong middle class", not tax breaks for the rich so that they will hire people...it's the biggest lie that the right wing tells, daily, and is usually eaten up by those who have no idea about economics here.

The only "supply and demand" going on in right wing economics is "Here's a gigantic campaign contribution, now I demand my tax break, and you're going to supply it"...

Fish on...

Todd

The mythical "Job Creators" that need less regulations and more tax breaks don't create any jobs...demand for their products by people who have money to buy their products creates jobs...and it's always been that way, and it's the only way it's ever worked, in spite of what big corporations, their paid for hacks in Congress, their talking head tools on FauxNews, and their sycophants here and elsewhere will tell you.

Job creators...what a joke.

Then when they milk the populace and put more of our public money into their private pockets, and there's even less demand for their products, they will yell and scream for more tax breaks...so they can "create" mythical jobs...again.

As usual, not surprised that the politicians they own continue to spread this lie, and not surprised that their very own "news" station spreads it even farther...the surprising part is the millions of Americans who believe the lie and go out of their way to defend it.

Fish on...

Todd

In spite of the expected, and incessant whining from the tools here on this site, this isn't really that hard to understand...and if it weren't Obama who proposed and passed it, it would be a no brainer.

"Our experience also demonstrates that getting every citizen insured doesn't have to break the bank. First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others. This doesn't cos...t the government a single dollar. Second, we helped pay for our new program by ending an old one — something government should do more often. The federal government sends an estimated $42 billion to hospitals that care for the poor: Use those funds instead to help the poor buy private insurance, as we did"

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. The biggest challenge for the Republicans right now will be to maintain the lies about the AHCA, and to blame it all on Obama being a Nigerian Socialist Kenyan Marxist Muslim, in time to win in November, but before everyone else realizes how fullofshit they are.

But Mitt Romney says not only that it will work, but that the Federal Government should enact it...especially the mandate.



Now he'll "repeal on his first day in office"...to get your vote he'd tell you anything, and you tools will believe it...so long as Obama's not saying it.

If Obama came out and said he changed his mind on health care and he'll work to repeal it himself, you'd have the hacks in Congress telling you how bad that would be, you'd have the tools on FauxNews telling you how Obama just ruined the economy again, and you'd have the sycophants here playing that Romney clip over and over again, and Romney, of course, vowing to not only keep the AHCA, but to make it even more extensive and stronger...on his first day in office.

Fish on...

Todd

"Pull their heads out"----you awake Dog? I hope not cause that there is a wild dream.

Forget the rest of the details and just use this one.

The majority of the citizens of Massachusetts wanted “Romneycare.”

The majority of American citizens did NOT want“Obamacare.”

Do you really think if the reverse were true in Mass. that he would have pursued it? Come on. There is no "mystical' flip flop....the people of his state wanted Romney care. It was a bipartisan effort by the way...everyone pretty much agreed.

There is no comparing the two based on the acceptance by recipients. Obama used it as a template to try to impose European type medical coverage on everyone.....which the majority does not want. Key word in this argument is acceptance.

Market is still climbing even though businesses are going to fold and unemployment is going to skyrocket because of Obamacare. Must be day traders who don't have to factor in doomsday 2014.

46,000 donations yesterday to the Romney campaign.
4 million bucks in the bank.

the sleeping giant may have been awoken.

repeal & replace the big tax hike.
keep the good. shitcan the bad.

Why don't you spend some of that cash you're sitting on by hiring some new employees

Kind of like Gregoire and the Tribes?

^^^^ Excellent rant!



The term makes me nauseous!


http://www.salon.com/2012/04/05/the_corporate_job_creator_myth/

"For the last four decades, U.S. corporations have been sinking our economy through the off-shoring of jobs, the squeezing of wages, and a magician’s hat full of bluffs and tricks designed to extort subsidies and sweetheart deals from local and state governments that often result in mass layoffs and empty treasuries."

You are spot on about this!

Fishy

This is nonsense. There were much better ideas ie singlepayer, public option on the table at the start. After months of battle with the repubs crying "socialism" & "death panels", this is what we get. All involved, including Obama, agree that this is a starting point. There's mush work to be done. I doubt anybody here knows what all is in this bill or how it will actually affect us when implemented. I sure don't. IMO, Obamacare is unpopular in a large part due to poor, inaccurate, often fabricated information being peddled as fact.

Do you think we should have stuck with doing nothing, AM?

It would have been easier............that much is clear.

inaccurate and fabricated

big words translated:
lie after lie after lie

translated by Chief Justice Roberts as:
tax after tax after tax

It could be.

Here's the deal, though. You can usually tell how something might affect the economy by the way Wall St. reacts to it. It looks like Wall Street approves, although I'm not sure why.

Chances are, Wall Street approves because now they really get to f.uck us over..................so maybe you're right about this whole thing.

Not nearly as well as I'd hoped... Sarah, but given the options available, an easy choice for a redo!

Before the Scrotus did their thing, I was convinced that what we had was another "Old guys screw the young guys" thing, and I'm still not sure if that is still the case. I suspect it is, but the whole damn thing is way over-written and a mind-twister, pregnant with legal entanglements, IMO.

So now we shall have young folks who don't need insurance paying for old turds who need ridiculous amounts of medical attention. KK will tell you (unless he's admits that he was wrong) that risk pools work just fine when the only participants are people who need medical attention, and that there would be no need to force healthy people to participate.....which is wrong, wrong, wrong. So my question is .... Are there sufficient numbers of young people who presently don't have insurance to offset the sick old cronies with prior conditions? I really doubt it.....really doubt it! So then.......the only result from that is ..... EVERYBODY WHO PRESENTLY HAS GOOD COVERAGE WILL SEE A DOWNGRADE IN THEIR QUALITY OF COVERAGE AND/OR AN INCREASE IN THEIR COSTS.

So if that is the result you "Save the World" enthusiasts expect......you got it.

Me? As an old fart whose body will no doubt begin to fall apart and the costs associated with keeping my cranky old azz healthy enough to continue stealing your fish skyrocket.......well, all I can say is....Gee, Thanks!

Your confidence in your never-ending ability to pay for all of your wishes is both amazing and, I believe....completely naive.

But, really.......thanks!

Free Spenders Unite!!

Maybe if we raise the costs for those who have served/are serving our country in the armed forces we could offset the costs for others.

Why not take from those that give and give to those that take?


The Washington Free Beacon
by: WFB Staff
Friday, June 29, 2012

Obama wants military members to pay more for health care.

The Obama administration on Friday threatened to veto a defense appropriations bill in part because it does not include higher health care fees for members of the military.

“The Administration is disappointed that the Congress did not incorporate the requested TRICARE fee initiatives into either the appropriation or authorization legislation,” the White House wrote in an official policy statement expressing opposition to the bill, which the House approved in May.

President Obama’s most recent budget proposal includes billions of dollars in higher fees for members of TRICARE, the military health care system, and is part of the administration’s plan to cut nearly $500 billion from the Pentagon’s budget.

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/obama-raise-health-care-costs-for-the-military#ixzz1zDe8fjkW
_________________________

That's not a good move.

Agreed...but I see a lot of not good moves happening before the dust settles. I know it's a work in progress but I fear there will be unintended consequences.

I'm trying hard to withold judgement until more time passes...

And in this State we can.

^????? Redo, as in re-election.

And a drunk lawn mower with a stupid fukin hat!

I think that only 1 in 6 terminally ill patients actually drink the lethal barbiturate dosage added to a juice drink or eat the pudding laced with same. Of that 16% that do, the lethal concoction is usually administered by a spouse or immediate family member in a final compassionate act. In many other cases, the patients personal Physician may administer the lethal "last meal".

It has been my experience (limited experience) that while a patient may request to take upon themselves the assisted suicide option, in the final days or moments they themselves do not go through with it.

I think a Death with Dignity Act should be available in more states, but I don't think the numbers of those who would actually take part in the suicide would change.

I think in the end that the brain is so protective of life, its life, that it will not allow that we kill ourselves. Even when things are hopeless, we will try to hang on and consequently pass naturally.

There are however the exceptions and I respect that decision also.
I honestly don't know what I'd do if I was faced with being in a hopeless terminal condition.

The right wing blogosphere is so full of TeaBagger nonsense today that it's making my head spin...all about the vast left wing conspiracy that made CJ Roberts vote to uphold the AHCA...he's an epileptic who can't afford the medication, he's actually a liberal who was snuck in by Obama (which is odd, since Obama wasn't President when Bush appointed him)...but this one's my favorite:

Roberts was blackmailed by David Axelrod because he (Justice Roberts) is gay...and that arrests are forthcoming, and Roberts' "real" opinion will be out soon!

http://politicstoday.biz/182148/rightwin...s-to-come-soon/

This is what happens when the Republican Party gets co-opted by the fruitcakes on the far right...who are no longer fringe members, but are the mainstream Republican Party.

For those of you who are actual conservatives and are lamenting the loss of your party, I feel kind of sorry for you, but not really...you're the ones who let them in because you wanted their vote...and you should have known they were snakes before you picked them up in the garden and brought them into your house.

For those of you who are those right wing nutcase TeaBaggers...well, I feel genuinely sorry for you, because you are fuckin insane. Maybe with the passage of the AHCA you can get medicated for that now.

Fish on...

Todd

Evolution. The main problem will be the many Republicans and conservatives who don't allow themselves to believe in evolution. Nonetheless, I think that over time the AHCA will be amended to look a lot like Medicare for all age groups. A national health care system. We'll be taxed for it just as we are now taxed for Medicare, but don't receive benefits from it until age 65. If Congress were to work for the welfare of the nation, instead of extreme partisanship, National basic healthcare will provide single payer benefits to all Americans, and the government will take on big pharma and the health industry and negotiate prices just as other governments do. And because the care provided will be basic, the affluent will supplement it with their own additional health care coverage, pretty much the way it is now.

Very good SG.

As all blow smoke up their collective rears the fundamental thing is we pay for the uninsured now but do not see the bill as it just hidden in the cost of everyone's health care. CBO says nope no 500 B Medicaid savings the D's projected and the 10 year cost projection based on 4 years with nothing going out was bit of a snow job. So it will be a tax which as I preferred a single pay to that hunk of junk they rolled out does not break my heart. Also health care is going to be regulated and is another fact of life as technology is expensive.

So they have to fix it and be it R or D the brutal political fact is single payer or modified, a tax is going to have fund it and it will cost as much as Soc Sec I imagine, the bad news. Good is for the first time the cost of heath care will be front and center be it Pharm's, Doc's, just the entire system. So the R's will resist the tax bit and the D's will want your wallet, with luck it will land a little left of center. Just ain't no way it will stay hidden.

On another note as to how cost is hidden by the system. My ex was a RN and rather good at her job but she went Temp Agency and would you care to guess her wage?






The answer is ......................



$50 and hour and she loved holidays as she would get time and half = $600 for 8. But most times she could do a do a double and pull double time and half for another $1000. She did love holidays.

I agree that we don't often hear what the actual costs of health care are, and if we did we'd find that national health care is a bargain...but as with many things, under the made up umbrella of the mythical "free market", what really happens is that the costs are socialized, and the profits are privatized.

We all pay thru the nose, and a few get all the money.

Fish on...

Todd

Had to make an adjustment to my list of taxes!

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
Capital Gains Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Court Fines (indirect taxes)
Deficit spending
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel permit tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inflation
Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money)
Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Local Income Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Septic Permit Tax
Service Charge Taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Road Toll Booth Taxes
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone federal excise tax
Telephone federal universal service fee tax
Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
Telephone state and local tax
Telephone usage charge tax
Toll Bridge Taxes
Toll Tunnel Taxes
Traffic Fines (indirect taxation)
Trailer Registration Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
Obamacare Tax

If you're in business for yourself, you left out a couple.

I've said it before, I'll say it again.....It's the governments MO to tax people into the poor house and then put them on a program. If you can pay all the taxes and still be independent, you are making way too much.

what a way to live, eh?

Hey, buddy....can you spare me a buck? or two? I can hardly afford my smokes and booze.

But to not a few get the money Todd but MANY MANY MANY. I read someplace the cost national heath insurance but simple math is what does it cost for a family of 4 now and extrapolate it in our population. It will cost ALL of us equal to our Soc Sec tax and then grab a hold Momma people are going to freak. I have friends who actually believe that the new provisions on pre existing conditions cost nobody. That keeping your kids on to 26 the same. They are dear friends but lord I wonder when they turned their brains off. NOTHING in medicine is FREE!

The government will be forced to drive down cost with drugs and TORT reform one & two as the quickest ones. Short term and especially long term care right on the next step. ( staffing & wages AND PROCESSES ) Everybody loves to beat on the Doc's but that is not the driver in cost. It is all the associated crap and drug companies will take a hit but then we will come nose to tail to the cost of research and drug development. Perhaps those who say medical research SHOULD be funded by the feds and private donations are correct rather than built into drug pricing. Like it or not eventually our rates ARE going to be governed by our personal choices. You smoke add$ to premium. Your obese add$$$ to your premium. You drink, well you get the picture and how they deal with chemical dependency should be something to see. It is not a few benefiting from the system now but rather MOST of us one way or another as everybody pays the others bad life styles.

You think you have fun with the conservatives now Todd? Just wait until the liberals are forced to accept personal responsibility! What the SCOTUS did was send the train on it's way and now we will all see the magnitude and depth that the Health Care Industry deception that developed by both D & R's since nation wide implementation of Health Care paid by employers. All the current President did was start something that can not be stopped but only revised / altered / replaced but it ain't going backwards. I am going to love BOTH the D & R's get what they so roundly deserve when voters realize just what the he!! is going on and you better believe MSDNC ( oops MSNBC ) and the Foxer will be all over Left & Right. It will take years for this to play out and as cost are recognized and the tax grows ............ oh yeah it will be SHOW TIME!

R or D they ain't gonna hide from this baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why thank you! Considering the source I regard that as a compliment. Time to crab a beer and wet a line.

Here's a pic to go with your caption, herd stalker.

Another one

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/arti...076e4b7d160206d

Who is paying for the tax credits that will be given to help buying health insurance?

At this point, it's all based on guesses.

Both sides are full of B.S. The simple truth seems to be that "you don't get anything for nothing" and "those that pay now will pay more".

This was sold as something different than it is. Even the name is b.s. The affordable what? Affordable for who?. Not the people that pay now. Less affordable for them. This bill was to sold to bring down costs and does nothing(well next to nothing anyway) to address that issue. This was about coverage and coverage only.

Kinda like stopping at a car dealer to get something to pull your boat and the A-hole sells you a prius sight unseen then delivers it to your house. You get home and go what the F-. Take it back and the guy starts talking about the MPG and saving the world from fossil fuel. Now our liberal friends become all wowed by the smooth talker and forget what they wanted in the first place.

The Repubs crap themselves as only latte libs believe in the enviorment and would not be seen in anything driven by a limp wristed Dem(they too forget they even own a boat but will never drive that prius regardless).

The center group looks around and says what the F- just happened? Is there a return policy on this POS? Unfortunately, no. As the SCOTUS just said "Once it drove off the lot, you own it." So now we still have our same original unsolved problem just with a new payment to make monthly.

Is this when we all talk about hard choices, and then never make any?

We all deserve what we get from politicians. They are elected and then left unsupervised. How many of you went and met your representatives and let them know how you felt on the issues and then followed up in person through out the process. How many voted for their reps and then went fishing hoping it would work out in the end? You get what you earn in life generally.

They were getting paid like that long before Obamacare.

Fish on...

Todd

How many really know what's in the ACA?

How about a quick quiz?
http://healthreform.kff.org/quizzes/health-reform-quiz.aspx

Another prspective.

OLYMPIA, July 12.—If you think the cost of health insurance is going to go down under health care reform, think again, says the CEO of Washington state’s largest individual-insurance health plan. Many purchasers of individual insurance plans may see premiums rise 50 to 70 percent.

It was a statement Tuesday that hushed the room at a health care policy conference sponsored by the Washington Policy Center at the Doubletree Inn at Seatac. The policies that drive those numbers are no secret. They are embedded in the Affordable Care Act, which has been the law of the land since 2010. But with the Supreme Court’s decision last month to uphold the law it has become clear that health care reform is coming. Jeff Roe’s statement might be taken as a word of warning. Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

“This is massively bigger than we appreciate, and may be bigger than we are capable of pulling off successfully,” said Roe, senior vice president for employer and individual markets at Premera Blue Cross and CEO of its affiliated company, LifeWise Health Plan of Washington. Someday, he said, the nation might be able to “look back and see if we landed safely and squarely and whether it is a step forward. Today I think the answer is unknown.”

Roe’s comments created a buzz among the audience, most of whom had some connection with the health industry or state policymaking circles. Given the complexity of the new federal law and the raft of new state laws designed to implement it, it has been difficult for anyone outside the insurance business or regulatory arena to translate it to a bottom-line number. But Roe’s figures, based on an analysis of his own company’s book of business, tied it all together. They challenge one of the central assumptions many have had about the new system that is just around the corner in 2014. Many figure that competition on insurance “exchanges,” the new state-by-state marketplaces for insurance policies, is going to drive costs down. In fact, costs are going to go up, and for the typical buyer of individual insurance policies, the increase might cause the jaw to drop.

At the very least, Roe argues, state policymakers now implementing health care reform need to avoid decisions that would further drive up the cost of insurance.

Richer Benefits

Reasons for the increases are all a bit technical, as is seemingly everything associated with the new law. A key point is that right now, most people who buy their own insurance policies, rather than obtaining them through their employers, try to minimize premium costs by buying policies with larger deductibles and copayments. But under health care reform, insurance policies will have to provide a richer level of benefits. The typical LifeWise customer purchases a policy with an actuarial value of 0.4 – meaning that the aggregate percentage of medical costs that are paid by the health plan rather than the customer is 40 percent. Under health care reform, plans that are sold on exchanges must have a value of at least 60 percent. So that means the benefits package has to be 50 percent richer.

Under the federal law, insurance companies can offer policies outside the exchange as well. But the Washington Legislature passed a law this year that essentially says insurance companies must provide the same policies outside the exchange as they do within it – because without the rule, state regulators argued that customers would flee and buy less-expensive insurance on the open market.

Add the effect of the mandates and taxes that are embedded in the act, and the fact that insurance companies will not be able to deny coverage to those with a pre-existing condition. Then add the fact that customers now served by the state’s program for high-risk customers will be entering the general insurance population. It becomes clear that the cost of the typical insurance policy will go higher, Roe said.

And the law doesn’t provide much relief. The law will offer subsidies in the form of tax credits to those who make less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level. But most current purchasers of insurance policies will not qualify, and for those who do, the subsidies may not be enough to offset the cost. That’s because the subsidies will be set on a sliding scale based on income.

“I think it is staggering that in fact the Affordable Care Act increases the per-person cost of health care from $9,000 to $14,000,” he said. “I find that just staggering. To focus in on two costs, though, I think really drives home that point.

Big Premium Increases

“The first is that in the individual market, we expect the cost of premiums to go up anywhere from 50 to 70 percent. Staggering amounts, and I can build that up for you this way.

“Our most popular plan in the market is our WiseEssentials Rx plan. It is a catastrophic plan with an actuarial value of 0.48. The minimum in the market allowed under the ACA is 0.6. So just on that basis it is a 25 percent increase.

“We expect the uninsured to add 15 percent in additional costs, because we know that they are less healthy than those in the system today, and if we get entrants from the high-risk pool, we can expect costs to go up another 11 percent.

“And then there is the insurer tax, which is 2 ½ percent. There is the exchange assessment, which could be as much as 5 percent. There is the Rx [drug] and device tax, which is 1 percent.

“So put that all together, compound it, and you are easily at 55, 60, maybe even 70 percent. Those are enormous increases.

Few Qualify for Subsidies

“And by the way, we talk about the subsidies and the benefits those subsidies provide. The fact is, there is a huge portion of the population that will not benefit from the subsidies.

“Seventy-five percent of our LifeWise Washington membership today is above 400 percent of the federal poverty level and will see no benefit from subsidies.”

In the small-group marketplace, meanwhile, where many employers purchase insurance, Premera estimates that risks will increase 7 percent to 9 percent, Roe said. “So there is another 7 to 9 percent in costs.”

An Important Qualifier

It should be noted that the premium-increase figures cited by Roe will not apply to everyone, points out Premera spokesman Eric Earling. There are plenty of variables. Certainly those who already are buying more-generous insurance policies will not see so great an increase. Perhaps it is safer to say simply that premiums will rise profoundly. But that’s the central message. Under health care reform, insurance premiums aren’t going down, and it’s something people better plan for.

In his presentation, Roe noted that insurance companies aren’t making the fat profit margins that many assume. In Premera’s case, it is 1 percent to 2 percent. Though 85 percent of the premiums collected go to medical services, leaving 15 percent, Roe said most of the remainder is consumed by such expenses as administrative costs, distribution costs and premium taxes.

Guaranteed Issue an Issue

He pointed out that the biggest insurers have been losing money on the individual market. Last year LifeWise lost $11 million, Regence lost $23 million and Group Health lost $6 million.

Premera attributes about one-third to one-half of the losses to regulatory policies that have eroded the rules surrounding the state’s high-risk insurance program. Basically, health plans in Washington state utilize a questionnaire that is designed to screen out the highest-risk patients, about eight percent of the population. They are eligible for the separate state program, which is subsidized by taxes on insurers. But regulatory changes have exempted about 40 percent of new insurance enrollees from the questionnaire. That has big implications for the new world of insurance that is around the corner in 2014, when “guaranteed issue” becomes the norm.

Roe called for more transparency in medical costs, mechanisms that would make consumers responsible for their medical-care choices, and rules that would penalize customers who drop insurance when they don’t need it and try to re-obtain it when they do. If regulators attempt to suppress rates, he said the state risks a repeat of the meltdown that took place in the late ‘90s, when insurers lost hundreds of millions and pulled out of Washington state’s individual insurance market. Premera, like other insurers, argues against efforts by the Office of Insurance Commissioner to consider companies’ surpluses in setting rates – essentially requiring them to take money out of the piggy-bank in order to keep rates low. The companies argue they may need it because of all the uncertainties ahead.

“The industry is in a perilous place right now, and I think given the additional costs that are on the horizon related to benefit increases, at minimum, it is going to be a real challenge going forward,” Roe said. “And it is why we say we need to have all parties represented here [at the conference] and in government to make the system more efficient than it is today, and in the process more affordable.”