|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 29 2012 @ 12:24 PM EDT |
Oh, and in case I sound bitter, if Obamacare actually provided health insurance
off those taxes that it enforces, rather than just eating the money, then it
might of actually done some good.
Instead it just funds private companies. (And yes, the IRS is a private company.
Yay Capitalism?)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Friday, June 29 2012 @ 12:26 PM EDT |
The no prior condition exclusions? (Already in effect for
kids)
The no lifetime limits?
The minimum benefit requirements, including wellness visits?
Of course this only pertains to people who want coverage, I
admit.
regards, hm
---
"Prolog is an efficient programming language because it is a very stupid theorem
prover." -- Richard O'Keefe[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 29 2012 @ 01:29 PM EDT |
> People can be sent to jail for not paying for "insurance to
live".
Huh? It's a tax, not a mandate, and no one is sent to jail for anything. You
can still foolishly choose not to have insurance, but there will be a tax hit
for doing so, but only if you have taxes to pay; if you tax bill is already zero
you won't have to pay anything.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 30 2012 @ 01:19 AM EDT |
My understanding is that when the Affordable Health Care Act was passed it
included no provision for criminalization and prosecution of not paying the
penalty tax. Because, to do so would place greater burden on those who are in
need of medical care. It only allows the IRS to collect the penalty tax from the
taxes an individual owes to the government.
stage_v
from under the bridge[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 30 2012 @ 09:59 AM EDT |
How does the average american win again?
Perhaps like
this
[PDF]:
Health spending accounted for 17.6% of GDP in the United
States in 2010, down slightly from 2009 (17.7%) and by far the highest share in
the OECD, and a full eight percentage points higher than the OECD average of
9.5%. Following the United States were the Netherlands (at 12.0% of GDP), and
France and Germany (both at 11.6% of GDP).
The United States spent 8233
USD on health per capita in 2010, two-and-a-half times more than the OECD
average of 3268 USD (adjusted for purchasing power parity). Following the United
States were Norway and Switzerland which spent over 5250 USD per capita.
Americans spent more than twice as much as relatively rich European countries
such as France, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
You can save
money by making some things a cooperative effort, and this is one of them. From
all the opinions I read about this I get the impression that many Americans see
this as government meddling and reducing freedom of choice. But freedom of
choice is always limited: if you block a cooperative effort you deny people the
right to choose for the benefits that system offers.
I don't know the
details of Obamacare. The Dutch system works like this. There is a base package
all health insurers are obliged to offer, and they have to accept everyone for
this. They primarily compete on price here, although some insurers make price
deals with hospitals and specialists and as a result limit your choice.
Solution: choose a different insurance company. On top of that they can offer
additional packages, and there they can compete on price and contents, and they
can refuse people. Health insurance is not the same for everyone as a result,
but there is a common basis that is guaranteed and adequate. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
