- Joined
- 19 February 2008
- Messages
- 1,532
you don’t want to get a life threatening problem there... treatment is long than life expectancy
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
UPHELD!!! Obamacare
- Thread starter s2kNSX
- Start date
you don’t want to get a life threatening problem there... treatment is long than life expectancy
Well, either way, hopefully this provides the markets some certainty though I know some small business owners are absolutely flipping out right now. They're already planning layoffs to get under the 50 employee minimum and outsourcing various job functions.
I do know that 2 trillion will now be pumped into managed health care companies. Time to bulk up on health care index stocks.
I do know that 2 trillion will now be pumped into managed health care companies. Time to bulk up on health care index stocks.
I wouldn't want to get a life threatening problem here either. Especially once the insurance company, without any recourse, obligation, or control says we are dropping your care and you are on your own. At least now there is some control.
Interesting comments on the Canadian health care system and taxes paid. (not 100% accurate) Canadian's do alright and we only buy health insurance when we travel to the US.
Think of this as a capitalism opportunity. If you can provide services for a public health care system, then you will be wealthy from it.
I have a client that opened a Cat Scan, MRI lab. He charged some of his services back to the public health care system and is now a multimillionaire. He told me you just have to be more efficient than the public offering of service and the system will jump on your services. The same can be done for lab work, etc.
Think of this as a capitalism opportunity. If you can provide services for a public health care system, then you will be wealthy from it.
I have a client that opened a Cat Scan, MRI lab. He charged some of his services back to the public health care system and is now a multimillionaire. He told me you just have to be more efficient than the public offering of service and the system will jump on your services. The same can be done for lab work, etc.
I agree... I think there is a lot of opportunity here. I have had a crop of upstart healthcare companies ask me for conference room systems. Once a system changes there is always opportunity. It's helping my economy in this way.. And my wealth will trickle down to downforce :tongue:
Now let's look if its constitutional. The left compare it to car insurance, its nothing like car insurance. If you dont want to pay for car insurance you sell your car. If you don't want to pay sales tax you don't buy anything, if you don't want to pay property tax you sell your house. It's the only thing I can think of where you can't get around.
No, the stats are the same. the top 1% have an average net worth of 25,000,000, even when the income (what is presented to the IRS as taxable income), is somewhere between 4-500 a year. You tell me how that is....
And I wouldn't call them politicians, more like retired politicians. Many politicians are the arm of the super rich, not the actual super rich. They only become the super rich after they exit politics and enter the private sector as "consultants" for the companies they were favorable to while in office. Is that bribery? I don't know... You tell me... LOL
You can't get around taxes either.
From a Constitutional perspective, it seems to me that this boiled down to comparing the weight that the limitations which the Commerce clause provides versus the ability for Congress to tax.
To everyone's surprise though, while the majority in the Supreme Court did agree in 'theory' that requiring everyone to participate in commerce is un-Constitutional, it spun the law as a tax, with a benefit that if you purchase heath insurance - you get a tax break, similar to a mortgage.
Oh well.
To everyone's surprise though, while the majority in the Supreme Court did agree in 'theory' that requiring everyone to participate in commerce is un-Constitutional, it spun the law as a tax, with a benefit that if you purchase heath insurance - you get a tax break, similar to a mortgage.
Oh well.
J
You just made the argument for the proponents. You can't get around it because health insurance is for you, not a car or house or merchandise.
Correct. With perhaps the following nuances: (a) Roberts did not want to preside over a continued partisan/political court and as such, he tried the to avoid legislating from the bench and used a rationale that justifies what Congress/President did albeit initially they both claimed this was not a tax but then the Solicitor General made that same exact argument. (b) And perhaps if indeed Roberts was tossing a bone to the conservatives by stating the law is constitutional under the power of taxation, it takes only 51 (not 60) votes in the Senate to overturn this - assuming the lower house would still have the vote after November.
While I fully won't doubt your cited info, I'll go so far as to speculate, based on what we've already mentioned, that the top .3% of that 1% weighs very heavily in that figure. I surmise Warren Buffet and Bill Gate's $50 billion spikes the across the board average (and the five living Walton's too). According to the tables attached, as of 2009 it was ~$13 million. I know chump change, right?
I'd call it a form of crony capitalism, but that's just me. While I have nothing against millionaires there are 250 of them in Congress, just sayin.....
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-11-15/congress-wealthy-1/51216626/1
Attachments
Last edited:
Sounds pretty fraudulent to me. They presented the Obamacare not as a tax, but a service, but their lawyers told the judge quietly it is a tax. You can't stop the people government from taxing you. Just ask the tobacco, alcohol, and the energy sector.
The only thing to stop it is to make the next round of election a pro business, anti big government, anti high tax politicians in and keep your fingers crossed.
The ruling was not a surprise because Roberts will act based on the law (as the swing vote), and will not challenged the constitutionality of it, since it was presented as tax, instead of service.
Good luck USA. Hope this doesn't bankrupt the country.
The only thing to stop it is to make the next round of election a pro business, anti big government, anti high tax politicians in and keep your fingers crossed.
The ruling was not a surprise because Roberts will act based on the law (as the swing vote), and will not challenged the constitutionality of it, since it was presented as tax, instead of service.
Good luck USA. Hope this doesn't bankrupt the country.
I like to stay on topic with the law rather than personal ideological arguments/talking points or drawing/invoking totally irrelevant issues to the subject matter just to try to make one's point more convincing.
But in terms of the overall politics of this, historically speaking (and yes I did major in polisci), the country has a tendency to self balance its political compass or center whenever it swings in one direction more than the other. And compared to the other "civilized/western" countries, our range for the swing is significantly narrower. So we are talking a bit to the left of center and a bit to right; when they go further out, the voters tend to self correct. At least thus far.
But in terms of the overall politics of this, historically speaking (and yes I did major in polisci), the country has a tendency to self balance its political compass or center whenever it swings in one direction more than the other. And compared to the other "civilized/western" countries, our range for the swing is significantly narrower. So we are talking a bit to the left of center and a bit to right; when they go further out, the voters tend to self correct. At least thus far.
Don't forget you can opt out and pick up your own privately for less. Also the "penalty" has no enforcement teeth. You can't be fined, arrested, go to jail or have it taken from your tax refund. In fact you can ignore the collection notices.
It has potential to decimate small business. Those with close to 50 will layoff to be under 50. Quality of care will be affected greatly. Wait times will grow exponentially. Debt will grow.
The biggest concern is EMR provision. Hospitals are going to force private practitioners out of business. Doctors will take a pay cut and lose desire for a made routine and menial job and take a salary position at a hospital.
It has potential to decimate small business. Those with close to 50 will layoff to be under 50. Quality of care will be affected greatly. Wait times will grow exponentially. Debt will grow.
The biggest concern is EMR provision. Hospitals are going to force private practitioners out of business. Doctors will take a pay cut and lose desire for a made routine and menial job and take a salary position at a hospital.
Where did these conclusions come from? This sounds like speculation.
And your point being? Obama is considered as a constitutional scholar. Obama won a battle but he is about to lose the war. Bait and switch in the private sector is against the law, and that is exactly what he did.
Now it's a tax. A BIG friggin tax. A tax on the middle class and poor. This ruling isn't going to make it any easier for Obama. The facts and numbers aren't on his side.
Here were the main selling points on Obamacare:
First, it would bring down the cost of health care. The President said families would save on average $2,500 a year on their premiums.
We now know that's not the case.
According to the “Kaiser Family Foundation,” Obamacare has already increased the cost of health care even though most of the law hasn't even gone into effect. Kaiser says 6 out of 10 Americans will see their premiums go up with the average cost for families being $1300 a year. Costs are going up, not down.
Here's the second big lie. You can keep your own insurance and doctor... remember when Obama said this? “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Wrong again.
The latest report from “The Congressional Budget Office” and “The Joint Committee on Taxation” says up to 20 million Americans could lose their employer-provided health insurance - a direct result of Obamacare. This is from Obama's own CBO!
The other big lie was the price-tag.
The CBO says the health-care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade - that's double what the President said it would cost. He's off by about $800 billion - not even close enough for government work. Where is that money coming from? Yep, the largest middle class tax increase in history.
Obama failed because he didn't first address the costs before he added to the list of covered.
55% don't want Obamacare and more than 70% of independent votes don't want it either.
Here were the main selling points on Obamacare:
First, it would bring down the cost of health care. The President said families would save on average $2,500 a year on their premiums.
We now know that's not the case.
According to the “Kaiser Family Foundation,” Obamacare has already increased the cost of health care even though most of the law hasn't even gone into effect. Kaiser says 6 out of 10 Americans will see their premiums go up with the average cost for families being $1300 a year. Costs are going up, not down.
Here's the second big lie. You can keep your own insurance and doctor... remember when Obama said this? “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Wrong again.
The latest report from “The Congressional Budget Office” and “The Joint Committee on Taxation” says up to 20 million Americans could lose their employer-provided health insurance - a direct result of Obamacare. This is from Obama's own CBO!
The other big lie was the price-tag.
The CBO says the health-care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade - that's double what the President said it would cost. He's off by about $800 billion - not even close enough for government work. Where is that money coming from? Yep, the largest middle class tax increase in history.
Obama failed because he didn't first address the costs before he added to the list of covered.
55% don't want Obamacare and more than 70% of independent votes don't want it either.
I am agreeing with you! My point was there is a political perspective to this as well. The court is not acting in vacuum.
Edit: To clarify: Roberts could have stopped at noting that the Commerce clause could not be used to mandate. But he "chose" to go further and rationalize the ACA mandate based on the constitutionality of using the power of Congress to tax. Did he need to make the argument for the President when the President and his Congress said it was not a tax. Of course not. But he did and one can only speculate why he chose to do so - until one day he gives his reasoning.
And yes President Obama argued that this law was not a tax - and was he making this case as a constitutional scholar or as purely a politician? I suspect the latter even if he was wearing an academician's hat/robe.
Last edited:
I also heard that small business can now "dump" their employees into the "system" and not responsible for their health insurance. Anyway the whole thing is kind of confusing with one side saying it'll save money and one side saying it'll cost money. I sense lots of Politics with this bill.
Precisely, I see and hear this in and around London all the time.
Well I can tell you guys in MA, where you HAVE TO buy insurance, I am getting mine through the commonwealth and not privately anymore. It is cheaper, for the same coverage. In fact, it is the same company. I can get coverage through the commonwealth of MA, provided by my choice of insurer.. blue cross, Harvard pilgrim, neighborhood health, and a few others... or I can call them up privately and get my own, having nothing to do with the state. But it is more expensive if I do it on my own.
I mean whatever it is, it is working here. It's also less for me to insure my employees this way than it is for me to get them a group policy. So I like it, whatever it is. I have saved about $100/month on my own policy, I have about 98% of my old coverage.
I mean whatever it is, it is working here. It's also less for me to insure my employees this way than it is for me to get them a group policy. So I like it, whatever it is. I have saved about $100/month on my own policy, I have about 98% of my old coverage.
Last edited:
