Health Care Bill Passed. Fallout?

[Ganbare Gincun]

Really the whole discussion about spending money to save money was fairly pointless, since that's not going to be the effect of the health care bill anyway. In the best case scenario - where the bill does what is actually intended efficiently - it'll add a half trillion dollars to the debt over the next decade. And if that's actually all it contributes to the debt, I'd be okay with that, because I know the government can piss away half a trillion dollars like it's nothing. It's the extremely likely increase of those deficits that worries me.

(Oh shit, it's the former director of the Congressional Budget Office writing in the New York Times, rather than someone on Fox you can easily ignore!)

You know that Douglas Holtz-Eakin that was the former chief economic policy adviser to U.S. Senator John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, right? And that he's the President of American Action Forum, your typical Republican Think Tank? And that he's been on Fox News ranting about how Obamacare is going to destroy America like Lavos from Chrono Trigger?

I don't take him seriously, and neither should you.

[Vnonymous]

Ask me how I feel sometime about having to pay utility companies for electricity or pay for car insurance or paying out the wazoo for money going to the military-industrial complex.

Yes, it's possible to frame it in such a way, but people should only accept the 'forced to pay money for profit-hungry corporation products' if they're just that narrow-minded.

If you really find people paying money to corporations for a product they need to have in order to get on with their day (otherwise they'll have their children taken away in the case of electricity, otherwise they'll lose their job if they don't have a car, otherwise they'll pay a fine in the case of government insurance) then start with nationalizing the utility and banking industry. I'm not saying I'm against nationalizing those things, I'm saying that until there's a credible movement to start doing those things you can shut the fuck up about your selective condemnation.

I live in Australia, where the utilities effectively are nationalised (no thanks to the best efforts of the right wing).

The insurance industry that you have in the states is rotten beyond repair. It is a gigantic money spinner and often denies people coverage for arbitrary reasons. There's an immense number of problems with it, and simply forcing people to buy into it isn't really going to help.

If you wanted to fix the health industry in the states, it looks to me like you would have to redo the entire fucking thing. Sure, you could keep the hospitals and the doctors, but your entire insurance industry is a joke. If I go to the doctor down here, it is something like 40/50 dollars Australian for a consultation. It isn't cheap, but god-damn if it doesn't beat the prices of American doctors by at least an order of magnitude.

Forcing people to buy into a rotten system is hardly going to make things better.

[The Lunatic Fringe]

Actually, this plan could be a step along the road to a system of healthcare like the one in Germany - wherein severely restricted private companies offer obligatorily generous plans to be paid for by the vouchers received universally by Germans. There are multiple ways to achieve universal coverage, and highly regulated capitalism is one of them.

[Crissa]

Robby, most of the conservative policies they have, and state they intend to enact, are fascist by K's definition.

One of the things they really don't like in this bill is a limit on the profits of Health Insurance companies. They cannot spend more than 15% of their gross income on administrating their plans and on profits. They also can no longer expect to kick people out for pre-existing conditions without proving fraud in court.

As a first step, that's a real big one. Besides, nearly every thing that conservatives bring up about the bill - aside from its sheer size - is just literally not true. They literally cannot mention the actual things in the bill negatively, because even their brownshirts won't buy it, because when it comes down to point by point, they support the points.

-Crissa

[RobbyPants]

Robby, most of the conservative policies they have, and state they intend to enact, are fascist by K's definition.

One of the things they really don't like in this bill is a limit on the profits of Health Insurance companies. They cannot spend more than 15% of their gross income on administrating their plans and on profits. They also can no longer expect to kick people out for pre-existing conditions without proving fraud in court.

As a first step, that's a real big one. Besides, nearly every thing that conservatives bring up about the bill - aside from its sheer size - is just literally not true. They literally cannot mention the actual things in the bill negatively, because even their brownshirts won't buy it, because when it comes down to point by point, they support the points.

-Crissa

That's the funny thing about it. I hear conservatives on the radio all the time complaining how "congress is shoving this down our throats" and "the american people don't even want it" by citing polls saying that something like 80% of people are against it. What those polls are really saying is that a total of 80% of people either don't want it, don't know what it's about, have bought into rhetoric, or are just sick of hearing about it. If you, instead, ask people line-item questions, suddenly the numbers almost reverse. You get something like 70% approval for the various parts and pieces of health care reform.

So if you ask people about the issues, they support it. If you give it the term "health care reform", suddenly people's brains shut off and they can't think rationally. So, the republicans have done a good job painting a very negative picture, even among non-republicans. Heh. And they bitch about the "liberal media".

[Username17]

Only tangentially related, but I really think that "Obamanation Stealth Care" is a name for a program that is so awesome that we should actually call something that.

-Username17

[Judging__Eagle]

Hey, if Obmanation is Stealth buffing the American Health Care Mini-Game, that's something awesome.

I'm not even from the US, and I know that it's awesome. The only thing that creates more power, is having more powerful people. The Americans being healthier is (hopefully) going to improve them as a whole, and hopefully that will help the world as a whole. They're a big economy, and they affect the rest of the world a great deal.

Over the years, the US has become more wealthy, by making everyone more wealthy. Not by pillaging or subjugating the people at the bottom, for the people at the top to have more. If they increase the amount of power (healthcare) for everyone, then the nation will get stronger still.

Seriously, you could use the Tome Wish-Economy example of why "everyone" needs to have access to Wishes/Health care. In real life, or a fantasy story, if only some people have something necessary, then some people are seriously getting the shaft. The only fair thing to do, is to ensure that everyone gets it (health care/wishes).




The biggest problem that Zinegata had with Crissa is that he somehow didn't realize that "spend some more, on good quality = saved money overall" applies to everything.

From health care (you, and everyone else has to pay for it anyway) to water heaters (unless you don't heat up water, ever), to shoes (a good pair will last for as much as 10+ years; a bad pair... maybe a tenth of that; and the cost difference is not very large).

Kaelik is just being his normal abrasive self, but that's fine, he knows what he is talking about.

Even when he completely misunderstands what I'm talking about. Which has led to much confusion, and argument, in the past. Any 'differences' that we've had in the past were more to do with him not having a clue what I was saying, and then assuming something that upset him. Then, rightfully, getting upset at me.

Crissa's example is comparing Granny Smith Apples, with Red Delicious Apples. Apples and Apples (aka, spend money, to get effective things, that end up saving money overall); not Apples and Oranges (Healthcare being related to Conservatist Terrorist movements). Seriously Zin, you kept throwing the A&O statement, over and over again; at the wrong people. Which is frankly hilariousmaphone.

[Lich-Loved]

As a fiscal conservative, I cannot say I supported the heath care bill at its inception. However, I am very glad the CBO indicates this will actually save money and reduce premiums, so I admit my view of the bill is much better than it was.

There is one thing that I have not been able to to see clearly spelled out, though so I am hoping someone here can point it out to me: when will I see a drop in my premiums and pay less in taxes? I guess it won't be until 2013 when the bill fully kicks in or is there a different time when they expect this to happen?

[Username17]

As a fiscal conservative, I cannot say I supported the heath care bill at its inception. However, I am very glad the CBO indicates this will actually save money and reduce premiums, so I admit my view of the bill is much better than it was.

There is one thing that I have not been able to to see clearly spelled out, though so I am hoping someone here can point it out to me: when will I see a drop in my premiums and pay less in taxes? I guess it won't be until 2013 when the bill fully kicks in or is there a different time when they expect this to happen?

Where does your health care come from?

If you fall into the wrong group, the answer may be "never" - since for some people all it does is reign in the existing growth in costs, meaning that your bill will never "go down" - it will just be lower compared to what it would have been with the status quo.

For other groups it's more or less instantaneous. But it's a horrendously complex system where they keep much of the system intact and threaten to bring the hammer down if insurance companies continue with past shadiness. As people demand and get the ability to choose to buy-in to medicare, your premiums will eventually drop precipitously, but that's not even part of this bill - it's the next fight worth having.

But seriously, how is your healthcare set up? Figuring out how it is impacted is entirely doable.

-Username17

[Lich-Loved]

let's see if this is enough info:

I pay all of my own healthcare costs through my employer (basically my company pays 100% of the premium for me using income I earn through direct billing and covers 100% of my deductible. This is done for its business tax advantages). I pay about 1300 USD/month premium and an additional 4000 USD yearly deductible. I also must pay about 150/month for prescriptions. So, excluding both sides (personal and corporate) of the medicare taxes, I pay about $24k in major health care costs, also excluding over the counter and common purchases. The plan is a good one, and I pay very little if any out of pocket beyond these costs. I use an HSA but with the ridiculously low HSA contribution limit, this does not help much and I cannot use the HSA to accumulate cash from year to year to offset future bills. I am not "one of the rich" per Obama's tax hike definitions.

My health care premiums rise at at about 15% per annum. To keep them from rising in the 22-27% range, I have changed plans in the last few years and accepted an increase of $1000 (up from 3k to 4k) in my deductible and agreed to cost-share my prescriptions to a max of $150/month as of this March. I am quite certain premiums will rise at about 15-20% for the foreseeable future unless this health care bill provides relief.

[Username17]

I am quite certain premiums will rise at about 15-20% for the foreseeable future unless this health care bill provides relief.

That is very true and is one of the most important parts about the healthcare debate. There is some stuff in there about forbidding them from kicking you out of the risk pool and such that may keep the costs from rising that fast in the coming years. I couldn't begin to say whether those proposals will actually work, because they are essentially untried on a scale like this.

It's 2010, so this year the following provision kicks in that may effect you (I;m discarding all the stuff about children, seniors, and the uninsured, because I'm certain that those don't apply to you):

Beginning in 2010, small business owners will no longer be forced to choose between offering health care and hiring new employees because they’ll be offered tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help insure their employees.

Now, as I understand it, your employer gets that money back, and suspicious as I am of the words "up to" - I suspect that it's 35% or some monthly number whichever is less. Which in your case, the flat number would presumably be the smaller number. But in any case, it sounds like your employer would be getting a pile of money to offset purchasing your plan, which you will probably have to split with your employer.

But yeah, sounds like you'll end up getting money out of the deal, starting with the 2010 tax cycle, so you probably get the money back next April unless you negotiate a compensatory smaller withholding on your individual paychecks - in which case you could see money start appearing on your first paycheck after you and your employer figure out precisely which bracket you fit into.

-Username17

[ckafrica]

LL: You pay 1300USD a month!?! I work in offshore finance and the most expensive plan my boss sells is 8k a year...for 75 year olds...with a 50$ deductable.

I must say this whole healthcare debate in the US has confirmed my long standing sentiment that you couldn't pay me enough money to live in the US. I'm glad I live in a sensible country like Vietnam

[K]

One thing I think is missing from the debate is the fact that, right now, lots of low-paying jobs are part-time because its cheaper than hiring full-time employees who get overtime pay and benefits. Instead, people work 2-3 of these jobs and get no benefits, which is pretty stupid.

Force businesses to give healthcare, and the quality of life for our working poor increases on not just the healthcare front.

[Crissa]

If no one noticed, the smaller the pool that is being purchased, the more expensive the plan. So, for a pool of 120+, we pay 9K annual for the two of us. Comparing that plan to an individual price, it'd be $10 for each of us. And then it gets worse if: You're female, or you work in any sort of hazardous industry, the wrong section of the country, an expensive section of the country, are older, have pre-existing or prior treatment, etc.

The Health Care Reform does away with a good deal of that crazy pricing, though it'll take four years for it to apply to everyone. So, it applies to small businesses and children this year, and next year it applies to individuals outside of high-risk pools, then high risk pools, then big businesses.

The thing is that the crazy pricing had built in worse prices because people could (or had to) go without insurance.

Yeah, we could use some larger non-profits. But... At least we got the basic frameworks. Community pricing, no recision, faze out of pre-existing condition exemptions, profit caps.

-Crissa

[Crissa]

March 23rd, at least five Democratic offices have their windows smashed, death threats received. FOX News Channel airs rationalizations of threats against Democrats. Palin issues road map with cross hairs drawn on Democrats. Leading Republican blowhard says Democrats have the moral responsibility for the threats made against them. And of course, many leading elected Republicans speak in support or terrorist actions to teabagger crowds.

Lastly, the IRS Commissioner states that they won't search individuals for Health Insurance, will expect the Insurance companies to notify them in a procedure much like banks and interest earned sending the individual and the IRS a post-card.

-Crissa

[Lich-Loved]

LL: You pay 1300USD a month!?! I work in offshore finance and the most expensive plan my boss sells is 8k a year...for 75 year olds...with a 50$ deductible.

Yeah sucks man. It is for a family plan and our group is *very* small (7 employees) and the insurance is very good. I could pay a lot less of course, but then I would have crappier coverage for my family. I am nearly 42 as are the others in my plan and a couple of them smoke, so that isn't good either. We buy an expensive plan because if we didn't we would make too much profit and then have to turn it over in taxes, so it makes sense to spend whatever we can on healthcare so at least we get a benefit out of all of our hard work rather than seeing it go to the government. This may be one reason small business plans are so much; since they are a tax deduction, people would rather "shelter" their profits in buying a fully deductible service (even if it is overpriced) than buying a more sensible plan and turning over the balance in one of the various forms of taxes we have to pay. The demand drives up prices. *shrug* It is just a theory.

I am a cancer survivor as well (at birth, its been clear for 42 years) but it still gouges me on health care costs and makes life insurance almost unattainable. Don't forget that "no preexisting conditions" does *not* mean, either in the new bill or currently, that they cannot charge you whatever fucking premium they want. Even though I am excluded from preexisting conditions because I have had continuous health care coverage my whole life, premiums are top-end for me just because of my natal health history. When the new bill comes into effect for children, for example, they won't deny coverage for a kid with birth defects, they will simply charge you $5000 a month for it. Anyone that thinks that the insurers are simply going to eat catastrophic expenses due to preexisting conditions is woefully underestimating the insurance industry.

@Frank - Thanks for the info!

If this works (and I am dubious, so I am waiting for the new law to show me my skepticism is unwarranted) I might be more open to other such plans in the future. Right now though, I can't say I am pleased. For example I see this AT&T takes $1 billion charge and I know there is simply no way that good is going to come of it. Coverage will be cut for workers, especially for retirees. I certainly hope those in charge know what they are doing because bad shit is going down. Then again, maybe this part of the strategy - make it so expensive to provide healthcare that companies do something like: sure we *offer* healthcare, premiums are 100% paid by you and start at $500/month for a crisis plan only, or of course, you can go onto the exchanges and try for a better rate. Maybe the goal is drive business out of the healthcare market and force a single payer system. When you see charge-offs like the one AT&T is doing (and there are many other companies doing this as well, this is just the newest announcement and the largest), what companies are saying is: good luck with that.

[Koumei]

I'm no legal expert, but let's give this a go:

March 23rd, at least five Democratic offices have their windows smashed, death threats received.

Smashing windows: Misdemeanour?
Death Threats: Felony?

FOX News Channel airs rationalizations of threats against Democrats.

Not a crime, but it makes them complete dicks, as we already knew, similar to saying rape victims "had it coming" (which they also did, explicitly).

Palin issues road map with cross hairs drawn on Democrats.

Sounds like an incitement to criminal action as well as aiding them, which falls under the same category as whatever gets committed. Hell, if one of the Democrats in question is murdered, then by aiding the process of the murder, that's known as Felony Murder (according to CSI Miami) and she wouldn't be running for presidency next year because lolprison.

Leading Republican blowhard says Democrats have the moral responsibility for the threats made against them.

Like with Fox, that just makes him a dick.

And of course, many leading elected Republicans speak in support or terrorist actions to teabagger crowds.

What's that? Supporting terrorist actions? If, a few years ago, someone vocally spoke in support of terrorist actions against Bush, they'd already be in a foreign nation having electrodes applied to their genitals.

How many of these did I get right? And sadly, the Democrats will feel that they should be "the better man" and shrug it off and tolerate this shit rather than allow these people to be charged for their crimes.

[K]

Here's a great article on what happens when you turn your back on the current crop of American fascists. They stab you.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... licans/?hp

[Neeeek]

I'm no legal expert, but let's give this a go:

March 23rd, at least five Democratic offices have their windows smashed, death threats received.

Smashing windows: Misdemeanour?
Death Threats: Felony?

Depends on what the DA or USA wants to charge them with. The most severe thing they are clearly guilty of is terrorism.

Palin issues road map with cross hairs drawn on Democrats.

Sounds like an incitement to criminal action as well as aiding them, which falls under the same category as whatever gets committed. Hell, if one of the Democrats in question is murdered, then by aiding the process of the murder, that's known as Felony Murder (according to CSI Miami) and she wouldn't be running for presidency next year because lolprison.

Probably not. The way felony murder works is if someone dies as a result of you committing a felony, you are considered to have murdered them, regardless of the specific of how they died. Like if you rob a bank and someone gets hit by a cop car that's chasing you and dies.

In any case, it'd be hard to get Palin on this as incitement or aiding, as she can claim she only meant they were targeting them for defeat in the November elections. It's not specific enough to qualify as incitement, nor is it immediate enough (you need the speech to lead to imminent violence, or it will usually be covered under the 1st Amendment) .

And of course, many leading elected Republicans speak in support or terrorist actions to teabagger crowds.

What's that? Supporting terrorist actions? If, a few years ago, someone vocally spoke in support of terrorist actions against Bush, they'd already be in a foreign nation having electrodes applied to their genitals.

The first one, from McCaul comes closest to crossing the line, but again, you generally need to encourage imminent violence to get a incitement conviction. I'd actually say that some of the things Palin said during the campaign came closer than most of what's listed there.

How many of these did I get right? And sadly, the Democrats will feel that they should be "the better man" and shrug it off and tolerate this shit rather than allow these people to be charged for their crimes.

Well, the problem is, actually getting convictions for most of this (everything except out-right threats and acts of violence) is nigh-impossible to get. Since the media seems to have stop caring about whether something being said is actually true or not, I'm not sure what the Dems can really do about it.

[Roy]

Oh boy, Kaelik called me an idiot, I guess I must be doing something right. Probably breathing.

So just to be clear, your roll models include Roy, Elennsar, Shadzar, Tzor, and JE.

But do not include Frank, K, Lago, Josh, and Count.

Yeah, I think you've made my argument for me. Thanks.

Fuck you, and suck a barrel of cocks you fucking fucker. Leave me the fuck out of it, and make damn sure you leave me the fuck out of the dumbfuck pile, you fucking fucker.

[Draco_Argentum]

If no one noticed, the smaller the pool that is being purchased, the more expensive the plan. So, for a pool of 120+, we pay 9K annual for the two of us. Comparing that plan to an individual price, it'd be $10 for each of us.

I pay $23 a week. This thread is making me hate the US more with every post.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Probably not. The way felony murder works is if someone dies as a result of you committing a felony, you are considered to have murdered them, regardless of the specific of how they died. Like if you rob a bank and someone gets hit by a cop car that's chasing you and dies.

I remember someone saying that since lying to Congress is a felony, one could plausibly charge W. with every death that resulted from the invasion of Iraq as felony murder.

I'd pay money to see that.

[Crissa]

This is why 'community rating' was important, and why the industry fought for its disinclusion.

Remember, no Republicans voted for this bill. Repeatedly. None of their amendments included community rating, national pools, etc.

They're the reason we got shit for reform. They lied, and continue to lie about their position. Look at their votes and their bills. That's their actual words.

They don't care about the American people. They shouldn't be on TV. They shouldn't be in office.

-Crissa