Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-07-2015, 05:11 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
(29-07-2015 04:10 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Muffs made no point. Instead he tried to obfuscate by making an accusation he cannot credibly make and hopes that no one notices.

Oh please Rolleyes *Your* credibility is minimal, based on your previous bullshit here. It's a perfectly plausible accusation.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
29-07-2015, 05:54 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
In the US, public assistance programs actually do often incentivize keeping one's income low. The value of the subsidy taken away when certain income thresholds are met exceeds the additional income one earns. This is not unique to Obamacare. In fact, though there are other things about Obamacare worthy of criticism, the subsidy for Obamacare is less trapping than other forms of assistance in that the subsidy scale back is more gradual as your income goes up.

There are other perverse disincentives such as if you work for a company that offers health care that is affordable for you personally, but not affordable for your entire family, you're out of luck. You and none of your family would be eligible for assistance or subsidy. In that case, some people have found it cheaper to reduce their own hours to become ineligible for employer healthcare. And no, I'm not just making shit up--I employ about 40 people, and have had to work through these issues with a couple employees (I've done the math with them to make sure they are correct. ) , and I only ever hire for full time with full benefits unless a current employee requests part time for personal reasons.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
29-07-2015, 06:06 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
The problem with Obamacare isn't that it keeps poor people poor. The problem is it makes rich people richer.

It's the same as automobile insurance.

Go to any state that USED to NOT have mandatory auto insurance, that now DOES, and ask around -- everyone you talk to will tell you that their insurance rates went up.

Why? Because now you have to have it - and the insurance companies know it - so they CAN charge more.

..................

It would be FAR cheaper and more efficient if we just went to full-on socialized medicine.

Why??

Because it would eliminate the middleman- the insurance companies -- who MAKE A PROFIT ---- thus skimming off money that would otherwise be spent on actual medical care.


Obamacare is corporate welfare - not social welfare.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like onlinebiker's post
29-07-2015, 06:44 AM (This post was last modified: 29-07-2015 06:52 AM by BnW.)
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
On the original topic - first, I agree with Muffs that you made up this conversation. It's not that I can't believe someone would have this discussion. I just think you're too much of a dick to have any friends.

That said, the basic point is correct - when you have government subsidies people on the bubble of the threshold have a real incentive not to better themselves. It's a known problem. I'm not even sure why it's a surprise to anyone. So, if your hypothetical janitor is getting $200/month i subsidies, he would need to improve his earnings by more than $200/month plus the associated taxes for it to be worth it. Otherwise, he's going to be worse off making more money because his insurance bill will go up by more than his income. By the way, a reality where you insurance costs go up more than your income is my reality so I don't have any sympathy for your hypothetical janitor.

Biker - I wasn't aware there were states in the past 40 years that didn't have mandatory auto insurance requirements. I thought that was universal since at least the early 70s. And, if you think mandatory insurance is expensive, try having an accident with an uninsured driver. My wife had that a few years ago - asshole let his policy lapse. Massive pain in the rump. He ended up getting arrested and charged because he called his wife right after the accident and she ran in and paid the premium that morning. He then tried to claim the accident happened after. That's called insurance fraud.

On your point about full-on socialized medicine - I agree with you. I'd have to hunt for it but there was a study during the Obamacare debates that concluded we would be much better off as a country with a UK type of system vs. what we have. Our health insurance set-up is set up to maximize the cost of care. It's insanity. The idea that there is a 3rd party payor between you and your doctor for every transaction is a sure fire way to raise costs. Insurance should be for big ticket items only and routine doctor visits should be set at whatever the market will bear. The costs of running a medical practice will go down because doctors won't need the 50 people in the back room who process the dozens of different insurance forms from each individual insurance carrier.

Btw, if you want to see another example of where 3rd party insurance is screwing up the market, go get a dog. I've had dogs for almost 20 years now and the increase in the cost of going to the vet is shocking. And, I'm 100% convinced the primary driver for these increases is the advent of 3rd party pet health insurance. Now there is a 3rd party for-profit payor between the vet and the pet parent. How is that not going to raise prices? I don't get pet insurance so I'm now paying full freight and a half. And, it really pisses me off. Not enough to get pet insurance, though. At least, not yet.

Oh, almost forgot: I also agree with you that Obamacare is corporate welfare. It was a massive windfall for the insurance carriers.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
29-07-2015, 06:52 AM (This post was last modified: 30-07-2015 04:02 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
Oh lookey. Blowjob is back. Weeping

If there are elements of the policy need addressing, which NOW has millions of Americans covered and happy with coverage they never had, and always wished they had, then elements of the law can be addressed and changed. Instead of the Repubtards trying, what, (?) 50 times to repeal the fucker ?, maybe they could try to enact some positive change. The fact is, it's here to stay. Every other advanced industrialized nation in the world provides healthcare for all their citizens.

Blowjob, if you have a positive suggestion, let's see a copy of the letter you wrote to your Congressional representatives.

Meanwhile, go fuck yourself.
And I mean that in the most loving and Christian way possible. Thumbsup

Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
29-07-2015, 06:57 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
(29-07-2015 06:44 AM)BnW Wrote:  Biker - I wasn't aware there were states in the past 40 years that didn't have mandatory auto insurance requirements. I thought that was universal since at least the early 70s. And, if you think mandatory insurance is expensive, try having an accident with an uninsured driver. My wife had that a few years ago - asshole let his policy lapse. Massive pain in the rump. He ended up getting arrested and charged because he called his wife right after the accident and she ran in and paid the premium that morning. He then tried to claim the accident happened after. That's called insurance fraud.

O

When I lived in Alaska in the early 80's it was not manditory. I carried PL/PD on a Lincoln Continental (a tank of a vehicle) and it was ridiculously cheap - compared to what I'd been paying in Michigan.... I think the price in AK was under 40 bucks a year. (it was a couple hundred in Michigan) It's since gone up hugely -- even counting in the price of inflation.

Same thing in Washington state.... My sis lives there. THey went manditory sometime in the 80's (I forget what year) -- and she was PISSED when her insurance doubled, then tripled in less than a couple years.

I had a friend who used to live in Georgia -- and he said the same thing happened there when they went to manditory.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 07:01 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
I'm surprised mandatory insurance would have that impact. NJ used to have a fund you could sue if you had an accident with an uninsured driver (even though they had mandatory insurance requirements). That drive rates through the roof. They finally pushed the burden back on the insurance carriers and rates came down. I would assume states without mandatory insurance at least had a similar fund.

If not, what happened if you were hit by an uninsured driver? You were just shut out of luck?

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 07:13 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
Dunno about uninsured driver.... I assume you were outta luck....


Here in Michigan it's still that way - sorta....

We have "No Fault" (or "Your fault", as it's colloquially known) If you're hit - and you don't have full coverage -- even if it's the other guy's fault -- you can't collect on your vehicle.

It's a weird system. One thing that I found out (the hard way) is if you're on a motorcycle, and in an accident with another vehicle (not another motorcycle) -- the driver of the car/truck is AUTOMATICALLY on the hook for all your medical expenses -- with no limit. (They're trying to limit it now).

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 08:43 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
(29-07-2015 02:05 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(29-07-2015 01:53 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Ayn Rand, paging Ayn Rand to this thread, stat!

Not an answer.

No, it was more like mockery. Enjoy. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
29-07-2015, 08:49 AM
RE: Obamacare, keeping the poor in poverty
(29-07-2015 06:44 AM)BnW Wrote:  Biker - I wasn't aware there were states in the past 40 years that didn't have mandatory auto insurance requirements. I thought that was universal since at least the early 70s.

California enacted mandatory insurance in 1988, iirc. My insurance went up $20/month within a year ... no accidents, no tickets.

eta: it was 1988, Prop 103.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: