The Cellar - Impeding changes to our Health Care system

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Impeding changes to our Health Care system (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=16747)

Based upon % or dollar amount? Sigh, still no graph.

It's like this: each dollar is FICA-taxed at 6%, up until you hit $100,000. Each dollar you are handed after that is not taxed. So if you make $100,000 a year, you are taxed $6,000. If you make $100,001 a year, you are still taxed $6,000.

Under Redux's suggested plan, that person making $100,001 per year would now be taxed $6,000.06, an extra six cents than he was before. For someone making $150,000, they would currently be taxed $6,000, just like the guy who makes $100,000. Under Redux's suggested plan, the guy making $150K would now be taxed a total of $9,000.

Thanks Clod! Still, it would have been nice to have a lil graph or a chart.... some type of visual. Sheesh, with all the stimulus money redux got you'd think we were worth a couple pennies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redux (Post 596316)

Its very simple.....apply the same fica tax rate to all!

As long as the person making $400 a month still has to pay.

I may never tire of the "Imma let you..." spinoffs!

Budget chief contradicts Obama on Medicare costs

Quote:

Congress' chief budget officer is contradicting President Barack Obama's oft-stated claim that seniors wouldn't see their Medicare benefits cut under a health care overhaul.

The head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, told senators Tuesday that seniors in Medicare's managed care plans would see reduced benefits under a bill in the Finance Committee.

The bill would cut payments to the Medicare Advantage plans by more than $100 billion over 10 years.

Elmendorf said the changes would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries.

Critics say the plans are overpaid, while supporters say they work well.

Obama says cuts to Medicare providers won't reduce seniors' benefits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint (Post 596527)

...

LOL

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 596553)

"Obama says cuts to Medicare providers won't reduce seniors' benefits."

LOL

At least now, with no public option, the tea party guys get to keep their wonderful health insurance (and provide proof of it when sending in their tax forms), and the democrats get tons of money from their corporate overlords.

Everybody wins, right?

Well, here's a heartwarming story to add to the debate. So the company's explanation is that they're doing him a favor by firing him and putting him on the path to SSDI, except that he would probably be bankrupt paying for his healthcare waiting for SSDI and I don't believe it would help his family.

I'm also not sure if COBRA would pick up the continuing care for his gunshot wound, a pre-existing condition.

If we had national health care, this wouldn't be an issue.

BTW, with tort reform, there's a chance that he wouldn't even be able to sue his employer.

Quote:

Cary, N.C. — An employee at The HoneyBaked Ham Co. store in Cary who was shot while on the job is now without a job.

Quote:

An employee for three years and general manager for 16 months, the husband and father was shot in the stomach – about four inches from his heart.
Several surgeries later, he's still unable to go back to work. Doctors tell him that the earliest he could return to work would be in December.
Huether has been on worker's compensation since April. When the benefits expired, he received an official notice that HoneyBaked Ham terminated his employment and canceled health benefits for him and his family.
Out-of-pocket, he said, those benefits would cost about $1,200 a month.

Quote:

Maggie DeCan, vice president of human resources, said the decision to terminate his employment had to do with following workers' compensation rules and that his release could make him eligible for Social Security disability benefits.
"We are a value-serving company," DeCan said in a statement. "We do the right thing and serve others. We couldn't feel any worse for Rich, and we would do anything we could for him."
The company, she also said, hasn't ruled out rehiring Huether once he is able to work again. Executives also plan to revisit the case next week to see if there is anything further the company can do.

From the Philly paper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 595694)

Are you a retard?

She was speaking to when I was on active duty, I do not receive medical care from the VA. It is not free medicine. People who get medical care in the military or from the VA get it as a condition and part of a contract they make with the military. If you would like to join up and have the same benefit after you pay your dues I am sure that someone could look into that for you, if you can make the grade. It is nothing of the sort of a non sequitur. But you are starting to make me think that you have some kind of problem understanding the difference between benefits after a contractual obligation and something that people get for nothing more than popping out some group of spawn from numerous unkown babies daddies. There is a huge difference. One group gets their care for free, one gets it after the delivery of and in the performance of a mutual contractual agreement between two parties. Get it?

Watch this... I BEG YOU. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...aroundamerica/

If you think the only people who need affordable health care are poor people popping out babies you are delusional. Everyone in this country, including you Merc, is a heartbeat away from losing everything they own because of some health disaster. In that program I listed, TWO CEOs of insurance companies said they would not be able to get insurance under the current system if they left their jobs. Nice. The truth is, insurance is great until you really need it. Because if something happens and you really DO need it, and you aren't lucky enough to work somewhere where you are pretty much guaranteed the very best insurance, the likelihood of your being dropped is very high, and then good luck finding another company to cover you at a rate you can afford.

For example, in that report, a couple of people had complications with pregnancy, and their bills were close to a million $$$ each. Could you afford to pay that if your insurance company decided they wouldn't pay it for some stupid reason (like you didn't report having acne or something equally unrelated to pregnancy)? Or what if you found out your kid was autistic? Because most insurance companies won't cover things like that. People are being forced to stay in jobs they don't like because they can't afford to lose their health insurance. Some people are having to get divorced or are being forced to stay in lower income jobs so they can get Medicaid for their children because they can't afford the coverage for certain illnesses, or they can't get coverage at all. WTF? And you support that?

And ftr, while I think those serving in the military deserve government health care, I do not believe they are any more special than anyone else in society. They do not deserve it simply because they are in the military. There are plenty of equally deserving people out there who can't afford insurance for one reason or another. People deserve treatment when they get cancer, or diabetes, or lupus, and they should not have to lose their homes (or DIE) in order to get it. Our health should not be a "for profit" item, like sneakers or corn or derivatives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 595830)

Under Clinton, Medicaid expanded beyond it's means. After the failure of his health initiatives the insurance industry, HMO's and Managed Care plans took off and essentially have run amock over our healthcare delivery. They have grown exponentially since the late 1990's. That is where it started. With the failure of them to get anything done and to do it right. After the failure they basically quit the game. And here we are today.

http://books.google.com/books?id=tK7...age&q=&f=false

And that is Clinton's fault? You mean it isn't the fault of republicans, who fought any change to the system? Or the insurance companies? Who fought changes to the system? Really? Jesus Christ Merc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 595832)

My point is that it is not free. That is how she described it. Do you understand that? Where as Medicaid is free for the recipient, and if you have no insurance and need hospitalization or emergency care you still get it, even if you can't pay for it.

NO, THIS is how I described it... "Funny you would feel that way, after working in a government-run agency for so long, and receiving government-run health care. "

And are you saying that all people (and their family members) in the military actually PAY for their health care benefits?