LumberJocks

Off-topic content. Click to see this comments: Repeal and Replace ...

  • Advertise with us

« back to Coffee Lounge forum

Forum topic by Dan'um Style posted 07-12-2012 12:52 AM 2178 views 0 times favorited 116 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View Dan'um Style's profile

Dan'um Style

13270 posts in 2735 days


07-12-2012 12:52 AM

Hey Lumber Buds,...please keep this topic light. No hardcore politics or other goofiness . KEEP SMILING
..
Please keep your comments short. Cartoons or 75 words or less and stay on topic. This could be fun.
..

...
My opinion is … lets work with the Democrats. Affordable Care Act is written, it is started. Improvements are needed to make it work. What are they?

-- keeping myself entertained ... Humor and fun lubricate the brain


116 replies so far

View Jimbo4's profile

Jimbo4

1183 posts in 1515 days


#1 posted 07-12-2012 01:58 AM

Man, did you jump into that mud puddle!

-- *Arachnoleptic Fit*: The frantic dance performed just after you've accidently walked through a spider web.

View Tedster's profile

Tedster

2290 posts in 964 days


#2 posted 07-12-2012 02:07 AM

Replace it… with a decent economy so I can get some decent paying work again. I’m probably going to jump the fence this time around and vote republican for the first time in my life. Force people with no money to buy into government rationed health care with money they don’t have or they get fined for more money they don’t have… Sorry, but I have trouble making light humor of this.

-- I support the 28th Amendment. http://www.wolf-pac.com/28th

View Dan'um Style's profile

Dan'um Style

13270 posts in 2735 days


#3 posted 07-12-2012 02:20 AM

Keeping the drama out of it, ... Revise it …. what should change?
...

-- keeping myself entertained ... Humor and fun lubricate the brain

View DonnyBahama's profile

DonnyBahama

215 posts in 1284 days


#4 posted 07-12-2012 02:47 AM

I’m one of those rare Democrats who was/is opposed to the ACA. My wife and I are barely squeaking by on our current income. No way we can afford to pay for insurance – even if it was just $100/month (unless prescriptions would be covered with little or no deductible.) And yet, I’m confident that the law would put us over the income limit for subsidies.

The fix is simple – we need single-payer healthcare. The good news is, we already have it (for people 65 and older) – we just need to expand Medicare to cover everyone.

-- Founding member of the (un)Official LumberJock's Frugal Woodworking Society - http://lumberjocks.com/topics/29451

View Dan'um Style's profile

Dan'um Style

13270 posts in 2735 days


#5 posted 07-12-2012 02:53 AM

I agree. How do we make it happen in a smart way?

-- keeping myself entertained ... Humor and fun lubricate the brain

View DonnyBahama's profile

DonnyBahama

215 posts in 1284 days


#6 posted 07-12-2012 03:05 AM

There’s only one way to make it happen at all – get the $$$ out of the political process.

From big pharma to insurance companies to HMOs, etc., there’s an OBSCENE amount of money being made via the status quo – and they’ll invest heavily to keep it that way – buying politicians and buying public opinion with hundreds of millions (out of their hundreds of billions) of dollars.

The same could be said of almost everything that’s wrong in this country. We can only hope that the Citizens United ruling swung the pendelum so far to the right that it’ll be responsible for a Constitutional amendment that gets big money out of politics once and for all.

-- Founding member of the (un)Official LumberJock's Frugal Woodworking Society - http://lumberjocks.com/topics/29451

View CharlieM1958's profile

CharlieM1958

15817 posts in 2971 days


#7 posted 07-12-2012 03:29 AM

DonnyBahama, I don’t necessarily disagree with you about the need for a single-payer system, but I’m curious about one thing: You say you can’t even afford $100 per month for insurance, but don’t you think you’d have to pay at least $100 per month in extra taxes to pay for government-run health care?

Dan, to answer your question: If we have to stick with the current law and make revisions, I’d say the penalties need to be even bigger for companies who don’t provide employee coverage and for individuals who don’t purchase insurance. As it stands now, a family of four with a $50k income would only face a $750 penalty for not buying insurance. Not only that, but the government, by law, cannot enforce the penalty other than by reducing your refund. Since people can’t be turned down for pre-existing conditions under the new law, it would be cheaper for people to just wait until they get sick, and then go buy a policy. When that happens, claims will go up, and premiums will go up for everyone who does have insurance.

Then, instead of just addressing insurance-related issues, they need to look at why the actual treatment costs are so high.

-- Charlie M. "Woodworking - patience = firewood"

View oldnovice's profile

oldnovice

3870 posts in 2120 days


#8 posted 07-12-2012 04:01 AM

IMHO there should NOT be a penalty for non-compliance!

There should have been a tax break (I think that John McCain actually proposed that but the GOP was against it and the entire concept) for those who buy the proper coverage! This also goes for employers and employees. The tax break can be done in a similar manner as it is done today with the medical deductions on income tax.

A little side note when I started working for one of the better known high tech companies in the bay area I had low cost insurance, low cost to me and covered my family too. That was short lived as two years later we began to get less and have to pay more out of our own pocket. That trend continued until I retired 3 years ago. I hate to see what it is today!

AND, this is a big AND, once legislators (I use that term to describe the people not what they are currently doing) leave office they are forced to comply with this mandate!

It easier to lead a horse with a carrot than a whip!

-- "I never met a board I didn't like!"

View DonnyBahama's profile

DonnyBahama

215 posts in 1284 days


#9 posted 07-12-2012 05:17 AM

”You say you can’t even afford $100 per month for insurance, but don’t you think you’d have to pay at least $100 per month in extra taxes to pay for government-run health care?”

Good question, Charlie. I guess I’m assuming that, under the ACA, my co-pays, deductibles and other out-of pocket expenses would be similar to what’s available to me today. With that as a benchmark, it’s cheaper for me to self-insure, getting basic/essential healthcare at a low cost/low income clinic at “no insurance” prices. Conversely, my assumption regarding a single-payer system is that my out-of pocket costs would be a lot lower, such that the increase in taxes would be mostly offset by the amount we pay every month for doctors visits and prescriptions. (Not to mention the access we’d have to care that we’re currently forced to do without.)

Bottom line is that the government isn’t going to run the program as a multi-billion dollar cash cow (which the current system certainly is), and that savings would benefit us all.

-- Founding member of the (un)Official LumberJock's Frugal Woodworking Society - http://lumberjocks.com/topics/29451

View lumberjoe's profile

lumberjoe

2847 posts in 1001 days


#10 posted 07-12-2012 12:51 PM

I have a job and have employer subsidized insurance. I still pay about 700.00 per month. With kids there is always something, so I generally spend 3000.00/year in addition to that. Either copays, prescriptions, ER visits when someone does something stupid, etc.

I also live under the umbrella of Romneycare, which is pretty much the same thing as Obamacare. I don’t see any before vs after difference, other than if I do my taxes before I get my proof of insurance letter, I get a 600.00 bill in the mail.

Things I like:
You cannot be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions
Extends eligibility for college aged children (goes to 26 I think now)
Everyone HAS to have insurance

Yes, I said it. I like that part. It is irresponsible not to have any health insurance. You have car insurance, right? If you can’t afford a 100.00/month plan, you are pretty screwed. That’s 1,200/ year. Step on a rusty nail in your shop and go to the ER for a tetanus shot. Without insurance, there is a 1,400 bill right there alone. Who do you expect to pay for that? I don’t want to.

That is the problem with this country today. Everyone has this HUGE sense of entitlement. Everyone is looking for someone else to foot the bill or help them along. Because it happens so often, we come to expect it. The only thing you are entitled to is what get for yourself. I don’t like paying for health insurance. Hell, if I ditched my insurance and saved what I pay for two months, there is my Laguna LT14SUV. Three months after that, there is my brand spanking new Unisaw. Priorities. where are yours?

Here is the TL;DR version
AMA is not perfect, but it’s better than nothing
If you don’t have health insurance you should be crippled with medical bills, I’d done paying my AND your share
You don’t get stuff for free just because you don’t want to pay for it. There is a lot of things I don’t want to pay for but I do.

-- www.etsy.com/shop/KandJWoodCrafts

View CharlieM1958's profile

CharlieM1958

15817 posts in 2971 days


#11 posted 07-12-2012 01:20 PM

Joe, you are 100% correct, IMO, about everyone having insurance.

Insurance of any type (car, homeowner, business, etc.) is made affordable by everybody chipping in to bail out the relatively few who have large claims. In the U.S. health care system, though, no one is denied emergency treatment, so a lot of folks who could afford insurance if they really wanted it opt to go without. Which means when they have a catastrophic illness or accident, those of us who do have insurance end up paying higher premiums because the providers raise prices to make up for the non-payers.

Even though I’m a fairly conservative free-market kind of guy, I think the fairest system would be one where the cost to the individual was handled just like social security. Everybody earning a paycheck would have a health care deduction based on a percentage of income. I’d be willing to bet that if every single wage earner was forced to chip in just a little, the amount most of us pay for insurance and/or health care services would go down.

-- Charlie M. "Woodworking - patience = firewood"

View jmos's profile

jmos

681 posts in 1122 days


#12 posted 07-12-2012 01:32 PM

+1 with Joe also.

I think it was really sad the Republicans reacted the way they did to the healthcare bill. the individual mandate was a Republican idea, came out of the Heritage Foundation, and was pushed hard by the Rebuplicans in the 90’s. I wish, when the Democrats started talking about it in 2009 they had stood up and said ‘it’s about time you saw things our way, let’s do it!’ They would have had every right to take credit for it.

I also don’t understand why more politicians aren’t in favor of getting the burden of paying for health insurance off of business. I don’t think any other first world country has this funding mechanism, and it puts our businesses at a competitive disadvantage. European style health care systems work; they aren’t perfect, but neither is our system. As the richest nation in the world it’s embarrassing that we don’t provide some level of healthcare to everyone.

I’d like to see a single payer system that covers basic healthcare to all, and a private insurance market that covers people for more top-of-the-line services.

-- John

View lumberjoe's profile

lumberjoe

2847 posts in 1001 days


#13 posted 07-12-2012 01:33 PM

Charlie, in theory that would work. I say in theory because we pretty much have Obamacare in MA. My health insurance has doubled in the past 3 years. My out-of-pocket has also gone up considerably.

This again, is an argument about the federal mandate vs the state mandate. If just one state does it, nothing happens. My Insurance company isn’t exclusive to MA, and I don’t think any are. If EVERYONE, like you mentioned, pays into the pool, premiums should at the very least flatten and no longer increase. I would be ok with that if my out-of-pocket decreased significantly as well.

I am a very free market kind of guy. The only problem here is I am not just footing my bill. An alternative to forcing people to carry insurance is forcing them to pay full price for medical care. As I mentioned that would be crippling to me even. My PCP bills my insurance around 500.00 for a simple wellness visit and the standard lab work. God forbid you remove a finger on a table saw and need it re-attached. You would have to mortgage your house to pay that off.

Those are the two choices:
1 Buy insurance. If everyone does it, it should be cheaper
2 Pay full price for all your medical bills. They should be treated as student loans where you cannot walk away from them via bankruptcy or other means

-- www.etsy.com/shop/KandJWoodCrafts

View lumberjoe's profile

lumberjoe

2847 posts in 1001 days


#14 posted 07-12-2012 01:42 PM

A quick story on the European systems. There is a ton of misinformation out there about waiting months for treatment, death lists, etc.

My boss lives in London. He tore his ACL on July 4th playing tennis. He was home from surgery on July 5th, It cost him about 120$ US.

-- www.etsy.com/shop/KandJWoodCrafts

View Bertha's profile

Bertha

12951 posts in 1446 days


#15 posted 07-12-2012 02:20 PM

I pay $1200/month for insurance for JUST ME, no family. My insurance is not very good either. I still oppose single payer systems.

-- My dad and I built a 65 chev pick up.I killed trannys in that thing for some reason-Hog

showing 1 through 15 of 116 replies

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

GardenTenders.com :: gardening showcase